•IBRARY 

DIVERSITY 

*N  DIEGO 


o 


THE 


EISE  AND  THE  FALL; 


OK,  THE 


ORIGIN  OF  MORAL  EVIL. 


IN  THREE  PARTS. 


PAET  I.    THE  SUGGESTIONS  OP  REASON. 

H.    THE  DISCLOSURES  OF  REVELATION. 
HI.    THE  CONFIRMATIONS  OF  THEOLOGY. 


NEW  YORK: 
PUBLISHED  BY  HURD  AND  HOUGHTON. 

459  BKOOME  STREET. 
1866. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1866,  by 

HURD  AND  HOUQHTON, 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of 
New  York. 


RIVERSIDE,  CAMBRIDGE: 

STEREOTYPED  AND  FEINTED  BT 

H.  0.  HOUGHTON  AND  COMPANY. 


PREFACE. 


IT  is  not  intended  in  the  following  pages  to  di- 
rectly answer  the  age-old  and  still  vexed  problem, 
"  Why  must  and  does  evil  exist  under  the  govern- 
ment of  a  benevolent  God  ?  "  With  whatever  of 
mystery  that  inquiry  may  be  obscured,  the  two 
great  facts  remain  unquestioned,  —  God  is  benevo- 
lent, and  yet  evil  exists.  Perplexing,  then,  as  our 
reason  may  imagine  the  explanation  to  be,  the  two 
cannot  be  incompatible ;  yet  how  is  it  that  after  so 
many  centuries  of  discussion  there  is  as  yet  no 
universally  accepted  solution  ?  Can  it  be  that  the 
premises,  upon  which  the  thousand  theories  pro- 
ceed, need  re  examination  ?  No  harm  can  be  done, 
at  least,  by  such  review,  if  it  is  conducted  in  a 
proper  spirit ;  and  it  is  such  a  discussion  that  we 
have  here  attempted. 

The  first  inquiry  that  meets  us  is  one  of  histori- 
cal fact.  In  what  way,  and  under  what  circum- 
stances, was  moral  evil  originated  in,  or  introduced 
into,  the  world  ?  And  the  only  authentic  informa- 


iv  PREFACE. 

tion  which  we  possess  upon  this  question  is  con- 
tained in  that  remarkable  narrative,  the  first  three 
chapters  of  Genesis.  To  this  (having  no  higher 
authority)  we  must  refer  as  an  infallible  record, 
and  seek,  through  a  critical  examination,  its  real 
meaning  and  purport.  Should  the  result  of  our 
studies  seem  to  differ  from  the  customary  interpre- 
tation, it  will  be  proper  to  test  our  view  farther  by 
scrutinizing  it  in  the  light  of  rational  and  theo- 
logical principles.  Should  it  prove  consistent  with 
and  even  confirmed  by  these,  we  shall  be  more 
likely  to  accept  it  as  truly  setting  forth  the  real 
meaning  of  the  story. 

Accordingly,  in  these  pages  the  train  of  reason- 
ing which  precedes  the  exposition  of  our  view,  for 
the  purpose  of  suggesting  in  advance  its  probabil- 
ity, and  also  the  brief  and  imperfect  comparison  of 
theological  doctrines  by  which  it  is  followed,  are 
both  to  be  regarded  as  of  no  higher  importance 
than  as  attempted  corroborations  of  the  view  itself, 
as  deduced  from  the  narrative  in  Genesis.  How- 
ever unsatisfactory,  therefore,  they  may  prove,  in 
whole  or  in  part,  their  imperfection  should  not 
prejudice  the  main  argument,  which  is  contained  in 
Part  II,  and  to  which  they  are  only  subordinate. 

October,  1857. 


PREFACE.  V 

EIGHT  years  have  passed  since  the  above  Pref- 
ace was  written  with  the  expectation  that  the  fol- 
lowing pages  would  then  be  shortly  published,  and 
they  have  not  yet  been  given  to  the  public.  The 
delay  has  arisen  from  various  causes,  but  princi- 
pally from  the  author's  unwillingness  to  put  forth 
a  work  advancing  views  or  suggestions  which  more 
mature  reflection  might  make  him  desirous  to  with- 
draw. Having  come,  however,  to  find  himself 
strengthened  by  subsequent  thought,  in  the  views 
herein  set  forth,  and  to  see  the  course  of  Biblical 
criticism  and  of  theological  discussion  (both  of 
which  have  greatly  improved  in  character  during 
the  last  ten  years)  more  and  more  tending  to  their 
support  and  confirmation,  he  ventures  to  believe 
that  their  presentation  now  will  not  be  destitute  of 
interest  and  value.  The  book  is  printed  without 
material  change :  a  very  few  paragraphs  and  two 
or  three  references  to  authorities  met  with  since 
the  original  writing,  are  all  that  have  been  added. 
This  will  explain  the  absence  of  all  reference  to 
many  recent  and  valuable  works  which  might  have 
been  cited  or  quoted  with  advantage,  had  the  book 
been  rewritten. 

January,  1866. 


CONTENTS. 
PART  I. 

THE  SUGGESTIONS  01?  REASON. 
CHAPTER  I. 

PAGE 
INTRODUCTORY        1 

CHAPTER  II. 

OF  THE  SOURCES  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY    ....    6 

CHAPTER  III. 

OF    THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MORAL    FACULTY    IN  THE  MENTAL 

ECONOMY 17 

CHAPTER  IV. 

OF  THE  ULTERIOR  EFFECTS  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY       .          .        30 

CHAPTER  V. 

THAT    THE    MORAL    FACULTY    IS    A    DISTINCT    AND    INDEPEN- 
DENT FACULTY 41 

CHAPTER  VI. 

THAT  MAN  HAD    NO  OCCASION    FOR  THE    MORAL    FACULTY  AT 

THE  OUTSET  OF  HIS  EXISTENCE 50 

CHAPTER  VII. 

THAT   GOD    MIGHT    PREFER    TO  MAKE    MAN'S    MORAL  AGENCY 

THE  CONSEQUENCE  OF  HIS  OWN  ACT 59 


Viii  CONTENTS. 

PART  n. 

THE  DISCLOSURES  OF  REVELATION. 
CHAPTER  I. 

PAGE 

MAN'S  CREATION  AS  A  MORAL  BEING  NOT  ASSERTED  IN  REV- 
ELATION   71 

CHAPTER  II. 

INDIRECT  EVIDENCE  THAT  MAN  WAS  NOT  ORIGINALLY  A  MORAL 
BEING,  —  DRAWN  FROM  THE  ACCOUNT  OF  HIS  CREATION 
AND  PRIMITIVE  HISTORY 80 

CHAPTER  III. 

DIRECT  EVIDENCE    TO    THE    SAME   EFFECT  DRAWN   FROM  THE 

SAME  NARRATIVE.      THE   COMMAND 93 

CHAPTER  IV. 

EFFECT  OF  THE  FOREGOING,  AND  OBJECTIONS  TO  IT  CONSID- 
ERED   104 

CHAPTER  V. 

EXAMINATION  OF  THE  NARRATIVE  CONTINUED.  THE  DISOBE- 
DIENCE   114 

CHAPTER  VI. 

EXAMINATION  OF  THE  NARRATIVE  CONTINUED.      THE  EFFECTS 

OF  THE   FORBIDDEN  FRUIT 128 

CHAPTER  VII. 

EXAMINATION  OF  THE  NARRATIVE  CONTINUED.  THE  SEN- 
TENCES NOT  PUNISHMENTS 139 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE   SENTENCE  OF  EVE  ...  .  .  .  .  .  .      151 

CHAPTER  IX. 

THE   SENTENCE  OF  ADAM 170 

CHAPTER  X. 

ELUCIDATION  BY  HYPOTHESIS .187 


CONTENTS.  IX 

CHAPTER  XI. 

PAGE 
REVIEW     OF      OBJECTIONS      FROM     THE      FIFTH     CHAPTER     OF 

ROMANS 200 


PART  HI. 

THE  CONFIRMATIONS  OF  THEOLOGY. 
CHAPTER  I. 

THE   COMMON   VIEW  STATED  AND   COMPARED      ....      223 

CHAPTER  II. 

DIFFICULTIES  ENCOUNTERED  BY  THE  COMMON  VIEW,  AND  THEIR 

SOLUTION 240 

CHAPTER  in. 

THE  COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED  WITH  RE- 
SPEC."  TO  THE  METHOD  OF  ITS  INFLUENCE  UPON  THE 
RACE 257 

CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED  WITH  REFER- 
ENCE TO  ITS  DOCTRINE  THAT  MANKIND  IS  A  FAILURE  .  275 

CHAPTER  V. 

OUTLINES  OF  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MORAL  SYSTEM          .  .  .      288 

APPENDIX  .  ....  305 


THE   EISE   AND    THE   FALL; 

OR, 

THE  ORIGIN  OF  MOEAL  EVIL. 


PART  I. 

THE   SUGGESTIONS  OF  EEASON. 

CHAPTER  I. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

IT  is  no  wonder  that  in  all  ages  the  presence  of 
Moral  Evil  in  the  world  has  confounded  the  minds 
of  men.  When  they  looked  forth  upon  the  mate- 
rial universe,  whether  with  the  searching  ken  of 
the  philosopher,  or  the  superficial  glance  of  the 
ignorant,  they  beheld  its  grandest  and  its  minutest 
phenomena  alike  obedient  to  general,  defined,  and 
immutable  laws.  In  systems  and  in  atoms,  from 
Nature's  farthest  verge  to  the  depths  of  her  most 
secret  cells,  was  manifested  the  truth,  irresistible  by 
the  most  stupid  or  the  most  perverse,  of  a  single 
Creator,  and  an  all-pervading  and  wondrous  unity 
of  design  and  government.  Recognizing  with  rev- 
erent awe  in  this  sublime  harmony  of  creation  the 
1 


2  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

presence  of  that  Eternal  Mind,  which,  sole  and 
almighty,  in  the  depths  of  his  benevolent  wisdom, 
fashioned  and  controls  it,  they  have  turned  to  the 
contemplation  of  his  moral  kingdom,  to  view  there 
a  spectacle, — how  different !  Instead  of  an  adjusted 
plan,  whose  beneficence  and  perfection  should  be- 
token God's  goodness  and  love,  even  as  the  voice 
of  Physical  Nature  proclaims  his  wisdom  and  power, 
there  seems  to  be  disclosed  only  a  chaos  of  chance, 
of  disorder,  of  injustice,  and  of  woe  ;  a  sight,  indeed, 
in  appearance  so  unworthy  of  a  good,  or  even  an 
intelligent  ruler,  that  its  observers  have  fallen  back, 
bewildered  and  alarmed,  to  the  physical  creation,  to 
vindicate  their  belief  in  even  that  ruler's  existence. 
To  reduce  this  mingled  mass  of  contradictions  to 
a  system,  and  to  reveal  the  harmonious  principles 
which  the  mind  instinctively  feels  must  be  hidden 
beneath  it,  just  as  all  apparent  confusions  in  the 
material  universe  are  constantly  unfolding  them- 
selves into  order,  are  the  true  aims  of  moral  philos- 
ophy, and  have  worthily  engaged  many  of  the  no- 
blest intellects  of  all  time.  Yet  strangely  diverse 
has  been  the  success  of  ethical  from  that  of  physical 
investigation  ;  for,  while  the  researches  of  the  latter 
have  discovered  only  light  and  beauty  and  uni- 
formity of  plan,  in  the  former,  the  more  extended 
the  labors,  the  more  various  have  become  the  theo- 
ries, and  the  deeper  the  confusion.  Even  the  rev- 
elations from  the  Deity  himself,  which  declare  the 
main  principles  and  general  outline  of  his  moral 


INTRODUCTORY.  3 

government,  have  not  dispelled  the  difficulties  which 
surround  it,  nor  shown  in  clear  though  distant  vis- 
ion, the  range  of  its  eternal  truths,  in  their  bright, 
connected  chain,  towering  above  the  mists  of  soph- 
istry and  prejudice.  Still,  the  admitted  facts  are 
unreconciled  with  each  other ;  still,  the  essential 
facts  themselves  are  differently  understood  or  pos- 
itively denied ;  for  still,  the  origin  of  SIN,  the  dis- 
turbing element,  and  the  mode,  effects,  and  purpose 
of  its  introduction,  remain  the  topics  both  of  funda- 
mental importance,  and  of  irreconcilable  diversity. 

May  it  not  be  that  in  these  inquiries  the  same 
error  has  prevailed  which  for  so  many  generations 
retarded  the  advance  of  physical  science  and  phi- 
losophy, —  the  resort  to  speculation  rather  than  fact, 
as  the  basis  of  theory  ?  May  not  the  philosophy 
of  Moral  Evil  be  elucidated  in  some  degree  by 
a  more  careful  examination  of  the  circumstances 
connected  with  its  origin,  as  these  are  revealed  in 
the  only  authentic  relation  of  them,  the  inspired 
narrative  in  Genesis  ?  It  is  true  that  this  story, 
under  an  exposition  established  by  venerable  au- 
thority and  the  general  acquiescence,  has  been 
almost  excluded  from  the  domain  of  ethics,  and 
abandoned  to  the  theologians,  —  as  if  here,  at  least, 
Reason  and  Revelation  had  but  doubtful  accord- 
ance. Even  so  Science  and  Genesis  were  supposed 
to  be  antagonistic,  until  traditionary  interpretation 
ceased  to  becloud  the  Mosaic  cosmogony.  Then, 
that  remarkable  narrative  of  the  Creation,  so  long 


4  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

scoffed  at  as  unscientific  and  absurd,  was  seen  to  be 
radiant  with  the  light  and  truth  of  Him  who  is  the 
great  Author  both  of  Nature  and  of  Inspiration, 
and  whose  word  is  ever  consistent  with  his  works. 
We  are  not  without  hope  that,  by  a  like  means,  a 
similar  mutual  support  and  illustration  may  be  dis- 
covered between  the  established  principles  of  Moral 
and  Mental  Philosophy  and  the  Scripture  account 
of  "  the  Origin  of  Evil." 

It  is  with  such  a  view  that  we  propose  to  exam- 
ine, in  some  of  the  few  pages  that  follow,  that  por- 
tion of  Genesis  in  which  are  related  the  facts 
attending  the  origin  of  Moral  Evil  in  our  world. 
Our  argument  rests  chiefly  in  the  construction  of 
the  historical  record ;  but  since  it  is  plain  that  the 
existence  of  sin  must  depend  upon  the  existence  of 
the  moral  agency  or  capabilities  of  man,  our  brief 
investigation  into  the  manner  of  its  birth  may  be 
properly  introduced  by  tracing  the  sources,  office, 
and  effects  of  the  moral  element  in  the  mental 
economy.  We  will  look  for  its  sources,  by  inquir- 
ing what  other  mental  qualities  or  powers  demand 
it  as  a  desirable  and  even  an  essential  attendant,  — 
thus  discovering  the  necessities  of  man's  nature 
from  which  it  springs  ;  its  office,  by  remarking  the 
manner  in  which  it  supplies  these  necessities,  through 
the  salutary  influence  which  it  is  designed  to  exert, 
and  does  exert,  upon  the  whole  mind  and  charac- 
ter ;  and  its  effects,  by  showing  that  while  it  is  the 
chief  means  of  preserving  the  entire  physical  and 


INTRODUCTORY.  5 

mental  being  of  man  from  lapsing  into  speedy  and 
inevitable  ruin,  it  also  expands  and  ennobles  it, 
alone  enabling  it  to  rise  to  the  glorious  destiny  of  its 
highest  exaltation. 

These  preliminary  discussions  will,  of  course, 
treat  of  the  moral  faculty  simply  as  a  part  of  the 
natural  constitution  of  the  mind,  and  will  have  no 
regard  to  man's  connection  with  the  Divine  Gov- 
ernment, or  to  his  future  moral  accountability. 
Our  purpose  is  simply  to  show  that  Conscience 
is  a  natural  and  necessary  part  of  the  creature 
Man,  without  which  his  being  would  be  incom- 
plete, and  the  analogies  of  nature,  in  the  laws  of 
animal  being,  violated.  We  shall  remain,  there- 
fore, within  the  province  of  Mental  Philosophy,  and 
repose  therein  upon  principles  universally  admitted 
or  thoroughly  established. 


THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  H. 

OF  THE  SOURCES  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY. 

IN  seeking  the  sources  of  the  moral  faculty,  our 
plan  leads  us  to  notice  the  identity  of  Mind,  and 
the  uniformity  of  its  laws  in  all  creatures,  so  far  as 
it  is  developed  in  them  respectively.  Our  attention 
will  be  directed  more  especially  to  those  depart- 
ments of  it  in  which  originates  conduct,  and  which, 
therefore,  occasion  the  necessity  for  the  moral  fac- 
ulty (or  conscience),  by  giving  rise  to  the  thoughts 
and  acts  of  which  this  has  jurisdiction. 

There  has  been  little  variance  among  mental 
philosophers  in  their  general  analyses  of  the  mind, 
and  probably  its  division  into  the  three  departments 
of  the  Sensibilities,  the  Intellect,  and  the  Will,  as  it 
is  the  most  usual,  will  be  seriously  objected  to  by 
none.  Of  these,  the  Sensibilities,  which  include 
the  appetites,  desires,  and  affections,  lie  at  the  basis 
of  the  mind,  and  are  the  springs  of  its  every  move- 
ment. There  can,  in  fact,  be  no  mental  operation 
which  does  not  originate  in  the  Sensibilities ;  for 
there  must  be  a  desire  to  act  before  action  can  be 
put  forth.  Some  appetite  or  desire  is  awakened, 
prompting  to  a  particular  course  of  conduct :  the 


OF  THE  SOURCES  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.   7 

Intellect  considers  upon  the  effect  of  such  suggested 
conduct,  and  the  Will  determines  for  or  against  its 
pursuit.  Such  is  the  history  of  every  conceivable 
human  act  or  thought,  whether  for  good  or  for 
evil. 

Nor  is  it  the  history  of  every  human  act  merely, 
but  of  every  act  of  every  other  creature  as  well. 
At  this  day,  doubtless,  the  analysis  we  have  refer- 
red to  will  generally  be  agreed  to  be  as  applicable 
to  the  psychology  of  brutes  as  of  men.  Such  an 
organization  of  mind,  indeed,  seems  from  the  nature 
of  things  unavoidable,  and  these  three  departments 
or  agencies,  inseparable  from  any  mental  constitu- 
tion, however  imperfectly  developed.  We  do  not 
mean  that  they  should  be  displayed  in  all  creatures 
in  similar  proportions,  for  it  is  in  great  measure  the 
dissimilarity  of  their  relative  development  that  con- 
stitutes the  mental  diversities  of  races  and  of  indi- 
viduals. Thus,  in  the  brute  creation  the  Sensibil- 
ities, or  lowest  department  of  the  mind,  predominate. 
The  Intellect  and  Will,  though  manifest,  are  feeble 
in  their  operations.  Brutes  reason  little,  and  are 
not  capable  of  forming  settled  mental  purposes. 
With  Man,  on  the  other  hand,  though  his  Sensibili- 
ties are  far  more  powerful  than  those  of  the  creat- 
ures below  him,  yet  the  Intellect  (the  next  higher 
department  of  the  mind)  is  expanded  in  a  vastly 
greater  ratio,  and  is  in  him  the  characteristic  mental 
feature.  His  Will,  also,  is  greatly  developed  and 
strengthened  beyond  that  of  the  inferior  creatures, 


8  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

but  not  in  the  same  degree  as  the  intellectual  pow- 
ers. Few  of  the  race  have  that  firmness  of  purpose 
in  any  endeavor  or  course  of  action,  that  they  are 
constantly  through  life  superior  to  every  enticement 
from  its  pursuit.  What  we  call  human  greatness, 
or  a  mental  elevation  above  the  average  scale  of 
humanity,  is  generally  marked  by  an  extraordinary 
power  of  Will.  We  may  suppose,  therefore,  that  in 
another  and  higher  stage  of  being,  here  will  be  the 
principal  change  that  the  soul  will  undergo.  It  will 
rise  to  the  full  development  of  the  Will,  (the  last 
and  highest  department  of  the  mind,)  and  through 
the  ages  of  eternity  will  know  no  temptation  or 
allurement  strong  enough  to  beguile  its  affections, 
for  an  instant,  from  the  conduct  which  it  loves,  or 
its  gaze  and  efforts  from  the  destiny  to  which  it 
aspires. 

We  may  assert,  therefore,  as  a  general  truth,  so 
far  at  least  as  our  observation  can  extend,  that,  in 
the  natural  history  of  mind,  Nature  observes  her 
usual  analogies,  and  that  its  development  in  the  dif- 
ferent races  of  creatures  maintains  a  correspondence 
with  the  progressive  steps  of  their  physical  organ- 
ization. Consciousness,  instinct,  reason,  all  are  mind, 
either  in  the  germ,  the  bud,  or  expanded  growth  ; 
and  though  some  would  believe  that  the  difference 
is  both  radical,  and  almost  boundless,  between  the 
human  and  brute  intelligences,  yet,  when  we  follow 
down  the  scale  of  human  intellect  through  the  va- 
rious classes  and  races  of  men  to  its  lowest  limit, 


OF  THE  SOURCES  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.   9 

such  imaginings  are  dissipated.  We  only  find,  as 
between  man  and  the  brutes,  just  as  in  their  physi- 
cal structures,  a  wide  distinctioa  in  perfection  of 
organization  and  degree  of  capability,  but  none  that 
is  apparent,  in  their  nature  or  general  principles  of 
psychological  constitution. 

Descending  now  from  the  general  identity  of 
mind  in  all  creatures,  to  that  particular  department, 
in  which,  as  we  have  seen,  originates  conduct,  we 
discover,  as  might  be  expected,  that  in  this,  the 
lowest  department  of  mind,  this  similarity  between 
man  and  the  brutes  is  most  marked.  A  careful 
examination  into  the  habits  of  animals  reveals  the 
truth,  now  generally  admitted,  that  there  is  probably 
not  one  of  the  sensibilities,  not  one  of  the  "  springs 
of  action "  to  any  conceivable  human  act,  which 
is  not  also  implanted,  in  some  degree,  in  the  minds 
of  the  brutes.  These  springs  of  action,  indeed,  — 
these  emotions,  desires,  and  affections,  (including  the 
bodily  appetites,)  are  a  necessary  part  of  the  animal 
nature  of  the  creature,  inseparable  from  its  consti- 
tution, and  essential  to  its  mental  being.  They 
have  been  divided  into  two  classes,  —  the  benevolent 
and  malevolent  affections.  Of  these,  (though  writ- 
ers differ  somewhat  in  their  enumeration  of  the  sim- 
ple affections,)  among  the  former  class  have  been 
placed  love,  friendship,  patriotism,  gratitude,  pity, 
&c.  Among  the  latter  class,  hatred,  jealousy,  envy, 
resentment.  Probably  these  lists  might  be  reduced 
in  number  by  a  closer  analysis  ;  but  this  is  imma- 


10  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

terial  to  our  present  argument.  Even  taking  the 
enumerations  we  have  given,  we  think  it  would  be 
easy  to  show,  by  multiplied  instances  if  necessary, 
that  whatever  appetites,  sensibilities,  or  emotions 
are  implanted  in  man,  will  be  found  also  in  the 
mental  economy  of  the  brutes,  performing  their 
more  humble,  yet  similar,  appropriate,  and  neces- 
sary functions. 

The  distinction  has  been  made,  indeed,  as  be- 
tween the  lower  animals  and  man,  that  these  natu- 
ral propensities  are  possessed  by  them  for  the  sole 
purpose,  and  only  to  the  degree,  necessary  for  self- 
preservation.  Such  a  view,  however,  is  not  sanc- 
tioned by  even  our  daily  observation.  On  the  con- 
trary, they  are  constantly  seen  exhibiting  themselves 
in  the  brutes,  in  manifestations  closely  resembling 
the  qualities  and  actions  of  men.  We  refer  not 
now  to  the  peculiar  instincts  of  species,  such  as  the 
ferocity  of  the  tiger,  the  cunning  of  the  fox,  &c. ; 
but  to  those  features  of  mind  or  disposition  which 
mark  individual  character.  We  behold  such  in  the 
brutes,  displayed  in  their  mutual  friendly  intercourse, 
or  their  outbreaks  of  enmity,  variously  developing  in 
them  from  the  moment  of  birth,  as  individual  pecu- 
liarities, and  even  perpetuated,  as  family  traits,  by 
hereditary  transmission.  So  we  speak  of  "  the  vir- 
tues "  and  u  the  vices  "  of  animals,  with  a  meaning 
not  very  different  from  that  of  the  same  language 
when  applied  to  men.  Nay,  we  often  seem  to  dis- 
cover in  them  a  sort  of  dim  foreshadowing  of  the 


OF  THE  SOURCES  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.   11 

moral  sense,  in  an  apparent  vague  perception  on 
their  part,  of  the  praiseworthiuess,  or  blame  worthi- 
ness of  certain  actions.  Of  such  impressions,  how- 
ever, if  such  in  fact  exist,  we  can  only  say  that  it  is 
doubtful  whether  they  are  instinctive,  and  is  certain 
that  they  are  not  of  a  kind  to  entail  moral  respon- 
sibility, and  that  they  cannot  be  abstracted  from 
particular  acts  into  general  ideas  of  duty.  Hence, 
though  they  may  suggest  and  foreshadow  the  human 
conscience,  they  come  far  short  of  it  in  nature  and 
essential  characteristics.  They  are  analogous,  in- 
deed, it  would  seem,  to  those  rudimentary  organs 
which  philosophers  tell  us  are  sometimes  found  in 
lower  animals,  useless  in  them  except  as  represent- 
ative of  serviceable  members  in  higher  organiza- 
tions.1 As  such,  they  are  an  interesting  object  of 
notice  in  tracing  the  similarity  between  human  and 
brute  emotions. 

But  though  it  is  thus  true  that  the  springs  of 
action  (the  sensibilities)  are  in  all  creatures  sim- 
ilar, and  produce  similar  manifestations,  it  would 
of  course  be  the  case  that  in  degree  of  development 

1  Man,  in  short,  is  preeminently  what  a  theologian  would  term  the 
ante-typical  existence, —  the  being  in  whom  the  types  meet  and  are  ful- 
filled. And  not  only  do  typical  forms  and  numbers  of  the  exemplified 
character  meet  in  Man,  but  there  are  not  a  few  parts  of  his  framework 
which,  in  the  inferior  animal,  exist  as  mere  symbols  of  as  little  impor- 
tance as  dugs  in  the  male  animal,  though  they  acquire  significancy 
and  use  in  him.  Such,  for  instance,  are  the  many-jointed  but  move- 
less and  unnecessary  bones,  of  which  the  stiff,  inflexible  Jin  of  the  du- 
gong  and  fore-paw  of  the  mole  consist,  and  which  exist  in  his  arm  as 
essential  portions,  none  of  which  could  be  wanted,  of  a  flexible  instru- 
ment. —  Hugh  Miller,  Testimony  of  the  Hocks,  p.  231. 


12  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

they  would  vary  with  the  different  grades  of  mental 
organization.  The  higher  the  nature  and  intelli- 
gence of  the  creature,  and  the  more  expanded  and 
diversified  its  faculties  and  relations,  by  so  much 
the  more  powerful  would  be  its  emotions,  and  the 
more  varied  and  complex  their  combinations,  as 
well  as  the  actions  in  which  they  would  result. 
Herein  lies  the  difference  between  man  and  the 
brutes  in  respect  to  the  sensibilities,  and  their  man- 
ifestations in  conduct,  except  so  far  as  these  differ 
in  the  moral  characteristic.  Man,  with  a  similar 
animal  nature,  has  a  thousand-fold  more  capabilities 
for  passion,  and  a  thousand  times  more  forms  of  its 
expression.  Accordingly,  as  a  mere  animal,  had 
he  no  moral  nature  whatever,  whatever  of  good  or 
evil  could  come  from  his  sensibilities  would  be  ex- 
hibited in  vastly  greater  force,  and  with  vastly 
greater  extent  and  variety  of  good  or  evil  effects. 
Acting  out  his  mere  animal  nature,  therefore, 
without  restraint,  Man  is  a  much  more  dangerous 
creature,  both  to  himself  and  to  the  Universe,  than 
any  other  ;  and  this,  not  from  any  peculiarity  of 
plan  in  his  mental  constitution,  but  because  his 
superior  development  creates  an  increased  capacity 
for  passion,  and  a  more  tremendous  scope  and  power 
in  its  exercise. 

The  application  of  these  remarks  becomes  ob- 
vious when  we  pass  to  consider  the  range  of  the 
Sensibilities  in  the  different  animal  races,  with  the 
similar  forms  of  action  and  conduct  which  they 


OF  THE  SOURCES  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.   13 

develop  in  all.  As  we  have  suggested,  the  danger 
from  these  "  springs  of  action  "  arises  from  their 
active  and  expansive  nature.  Implanted  for  neces- 
sary and  benevolent  purposes,  they  are,  in  their 
normal  and  balanced  action,  not  only  essential  to 
the  existence  of  the  creature,  but  conducive  to  its 
happiness.  Yet,  as  in  the  material  universe  we  be- 
hold the  same  forces  at  one  time  gently  wafting 
fragrance  to  the  flower,  and  moistening  with  dew 
its  delicate  petals,  and  at  another,  rising  into  fear- 
ful agencies  of  evil  to  sweep  the  earth  with  ruin 
and  terror ;  so  the  kindly  and  healthful  appetites,  at 
times  advancing  with  unregulated  energy,  expand 
into  raging  passions,  and  draw  havoc  and  destruc- 
tion in  their  train.  Nor  are  these  tendencies  and 
results  peculiar  to  human  sensibilities.  Thus  it  has 
ever  been  since  sentient  beings  were  first  created. 
The  records  of  Earth's  historic  tablets  teach  us,  that, 
thousands  of  ages  before  man  waked  into  exist- 
ence, nature  had  armed  insects  and  rejptiles  with 
weapons  of  warfare  and  torture,  which  they  wielded 
against  each  other  in  the  deadly  encounters  of  pas- 
sion. Epoch  on  epoch  came  and  went  while  the 
slow-forming  world  was  preparing  for  its  human 
tenants,  which  saw  its  seas  daily  lashed  with  mortal 
conflicts,  and  heard  amid  its  primeval  forests  the 
fearful  cries  of  rage,  of  suffering,  and  of  violent 
death.  So  from  those  distant  periods  down  to  the 
present  hour,  passion,  with  the  thousand  miseries  it 
occasions,  has  marked  the  history  of  all  creatures, 


14  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

human  and  brute  alike,  in  proportion  to  their  re- 
spective capacities  and  opportunities  for  its  exer- 
cise. Hence  it  appears  that  man  is  not  alone  in 
the  distress,  ruin,  and  death  which  he  suffers  from 
natural  appetites,  and  which  we  frequently,  and  in 
one  sense  properly,  speak  of  as  the  effects  of  sin. 
The  same  evils  prevailed  long  before  sin  became 
an  inmate  of  creation,  and  still  prevail  among  the 
animals  which  never  sinned,  and  upon  which  no 
curse  was  ever  denounced.  Man's  experience  in 
these  respects,  therefore,  is  the  same  with  that  of 
all  sentient  beings,  and  in  entire  accordance  with 
the  laws  of  life,  established  with  its  first  awakening 
in  the  universe.1 

1  In  Hugh  Miller's  Testimony  of  the  Rocks  occurs  the  following 
passage  (page  102):  — 

"  This  early  exhibition  of  tooth,  and  spine,  and  sting,  —  of  •weapons 
constructed  alike  to  cut  and  to  pierce,  —  to  unite  two  of  the  most 
indispensable  requisites  of  the  modern  armorer  —  a  keen  edge  to  a 
stiff  back  —  nay,  stranger  still,  the  examples  furnished  in  this  prime- 
val time  of  weapons  formed  not  only  to  kill  but  also  to  torture, — must 
be  altogether  at  variance  with  the  preconceived  opinions  of  those  who 
hold,  that,  until  man  appeared  in  creation  and  darkened  its  sympa- 
thetic face  with  the  stain  of  moral  guilt,  the  reign  of  violence  and 
outrage  did  not  begin,  and  that  there  was  no  death  among  the  inferior 
creatures,  and  no  suffering.  But  preconceived  opinion,  whether  it  hold 
fast  with  Lactantius  and  the  old  Schoolmen  to  the  belief  that  there 
can  be  no  antipodes,  or  assert  with  Caccini  and  Bellarmine  that  our 
globe  hangs  lazily  in  the  midst  of  the  heavens,  while  the  sun  moves 
round  it,  must  yield  ultimately  to  scientific  truth.  And  it  is  a  truth  as 
certain  as  the  existence  of  a  southern  hemisphere,  or  the  motion  of  the 
earth  around  both  its  own  axis  and  the  great  solar  centre,  that,  untold 
ages  ere  man  had  sinned  and  suffered,  the  animal  creation  exhibited 
exactly  its  present  state  of  war :  that  the  strong,  armed  with  formid- 
able weapons,  exquisitely  constructed  to  kill,  preyed  upon  the  weak; 


OF  THE  SOURCES  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.   15 

The  only  difference,  then,  between  man  and  the 
brutes,  in  regard  to  these  phenomena  of  the  pas- 
sions, lies  in  the  circumstance  that  in  him  their 
allowance  is  invested  with  a  moral  character,  which 
in  them  it  does  not  possess.  It  is  now  generally 
agreed  by  moralists  that  it  is  the  act  of  the  Witt, 
permitting  the  undue  sway  of  passion,  to  which  the 
moral  quality  attaches,  and  not  to  the  passions 
themselves.  We  should  carefully  distinguish,  there- 
fore, between  the  passions  with  their  evil  conse- 
quences, (which  are  common  to  all  creatures,)  and 
the  moral  character,  with  which,  in  the  human  race, 
their  permitted  supremacy  is  associated.  Disturb- 
ance, suffering,  and  death,  their  usual  attendants, 
as  we  have  seen,  are  not  peculiar  to  man,  nor 
ascribable  to  his  moral  relations.  Strictly,  there- 
fore, these  evils  are  not  the  consequences  of  Sin^ 
if  by  sin  we  mean  that  feature  connected  with  the 
propensities  which  is  peculiar  to  man,  to  wit,  the 

and  that  the  weak  —  sheathed,  many  of  them,  in  defensive  armor, 
equally  admirable  in  its  mechanism,  and  ever  increasing  and  multi- 
plying upon  the  earth  far  beyond  the  requirements  of  the  mere  main- 
tenance of  their  races  —  were  enabled  to  escape  as  species  the  assaults 
of  the  tyrant  tribes,  and  to  exist  unthinned  for  unreckoned  ages.  It 
has  been  weakly  and  impiously  urged  —  as  if  it  were  merely  with  the 
geologist  that  men  had  to  settle  this  matter — that  such  an  economy 
of  warfare  and  suffering  —  of  warring  and  of  being  warred  upon  — 
would  be,  in  the  words  of  the  infant  Goethe,  unworthy  of  an  all- 
powerful  and  all-benevolent  Providence,  and,  in  effect,  a  libel  on  his 
government  and  character.  But  that  grave  charge  we  leave  the 
objectors  to  settle  with  the  great  Creator  himself.  Be  it  theirs,  not 
ours,  to 

"  Snatch  from  his  hands  the  balance  and  the  rod, 
Kejudge  his  justice,  —be  the  god  of  God." 


16  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

guilt  attending  their  permitted  excess.  They  are 
the  effect  of  passions,  the  yielding  to  whose  sway 
is  sinful,  but  not  the  effect  of  this  sinfulness  ;  of  pas- 
sions whose  existence,  operation,  and  results  are 
independent  of  moral  accountability ;  and  which  in 
man,  as  in  the  brutes,  would  be  undistinguished 
from  the  rest  of  his  animal  nature,  but  for  a  new 
perception  implanted  in  his  breast,  through  which 
he  recognizes  them  as  entailing  upon  him  a  moral 
responsibility  for  their  government. 

Here,  then,  is  where  Conscience  (this  new  per- 
ception) has  its  sources :  since  its  functions  relate 
exclusively  to  the  right  regulation  and  control  of  the 
human  Sensibilities.  We  have  established  the  fact, 
that  in  that  department  of  the  mind  which  thus  gives 
occasion  for  its  exercise,  and  over  which,  therefore,  it 
in  a  manner  presides,  Man  is  organized  substantially 
like  other  creatures,  and  under  similar  conditions 
of  existence.  We  shall  next  inquire  into  the  office 
which  the  conscience  thus  performs  in  the  natural 
(not  the  moral)  economy,  and  how  far  the  anal- 
ogies and  necessities  of  being  demand  it,  or  some 
equivalent  for  it,  as  a  part  of  the  animal  nature. 


OFFICE  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.  17 


CHAPTER  III. 

OF  THE  OFFICE  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY  IN  THE 
MENTAL  ECONOMY. 

HITHERTO  we  have  considered  the  active  powers 
of  the  mind, —  the  energies  which  give  it  movement 
and  direction.  We  have  seen  that  these  are,  in  plan 
and  operation,  the  same  in  all  creatures  ;  that  they 
are  both  necessary,  and,  in  their  legitimate  use,  pro- 
motive  of  happiness ;  but  that  when  in  any  being 
they  transcend  this  limit,  they  become  the  baleful 
agents  of  misery  and  ruin.  We  shall  now  inquire 
after  the  forces,  if  any,  which  Nature  has  provided 
as  offsets  and  safeguards  against  these  liabilities  to 
passionate  excess,  for  the  preservation  of  the  creat- 
ure ;  what  influences  of  a  restraining  tendency  she 
may  have  furnished  to  check  the  rising  excitements 
of  the  susceptibilities,  and  to  control  their  ordinary 
movements  within  safe  and  natural  bounds. 

We  assume  at  the  outset  the  existence  of  such 
provisions ;  for,  from  the  phenomena  which  Nature 
displays  in  the  material  creation,  we  are  led  by  the 
laws  of  her  usual  analogies  to  look  for  a  system  of 
forces  and  balances,  of  impulses  and  counteractions 
in  the  mental  universe.  In  the  motions  of  the 
spheres,  in  the  changes  and  influences  of  the  differ- 


18  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

ent  seasons,  in  the  action  of  the  elements,  in  the 
development  and  laws  of  animal  and  vegetable 
existences,  —  wherever,  in  fact,  we  behold  life  and 
movement  in  the  physical  domain,  we  see  energies 
working  under  the  control  of  counter-energies,  — 
a  system  of  forces  and  counter-forces,  whose  mutual 
regulation  educes  general  harmony.  Yet  not  here, 
more  than  in  the  field  of  mind,  are  the  adjustments 
so  perfectly  preserved  as  to  preclude  all  irregulari- 
ties ;  for  often  some  element  or  force  will  break  like 
a  swelling  passion  through  its  surrounding  barriers, 
and  sweep  creation  with  havoc,  until  its  power  is 
spent,  or  it  is  brought  again  under  control.*  Where 
then,  in  the  universe  of  mind,  do  we  find  these 
restraining  forces  for  which  we  inquire  ?  What  in- 
fluences do  we  discover  which  operate  as  checks 
and  brakes  upon  the  onward  driving  propensities, 
serving  to  moderate  and  determine  their  otherwise 
headlong  course  ?  The  inquiry  relates  not  to  the 
being  of  man  merely,  but  to  that  of  all  creatures 
in  which  these  propensities  subsist. 

We  should  expect,  in  conformity  with  a  general 
principle  of  Nature,  that  such  checks  in  the  differ- 
ent classes  of  being  would  be  proportioned,  in  num- 
ber and  strength,  to  the  degree  of  necessity  which 
they  might  respectively  require  ;  in  other  words, 
that  they  would  be  provided,  in  different  creatures, 
in  increased  or  diminished  ratio,  according  to  the 
power  of  their  respective  appetites,  and  the  circum- 
stances surrounding  them,  which  are  likely  to  draw 


OFFICE  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.  19 

out  those  appetites  in  passionate  excess.  Thus  the 
insect  or  the  worm  which  feels  probably  little  more 
than  the  mere  consciousness  of  existence,  and  is,  so 
far  as  we  know,  almost  isolated  from  its  fellows,  as 
regards  the  interchange  of  sentiment,  needs  few  in- 
fluences to  restrain  'passions  which  it  can  hardjy  be 
thought  to  possess.  And  even  with  the  brutes  of 
the  higher  grades,  so  few  and  simple,  at  best,  are 
the  emotions  of  which  they  are  capable,  so  limited 
and  vague  are  their  relations  to  each  other,  and  so 
few  their  opportunities,  means,  and  topics  of  mutual 
communication,  that  their  intercourse  is  reduced  to 
the  simplest  character,  little  likely,  to  elicit  or  foster 
the  passions  beyond  their  natural  and  proper  growth. 
Add  to  these  natural  limitations,  their  temperate 
and  equable  habits  and  modes  of  life,  their  plain  and 
natural  diet,  and  the  facility  with  which  their  few 
wants  are  satisfied,  together  with  their  various  in- 
stincts, and  the  effect  wrought  by  changes  of  the 
seasons  upon  their  feelings  and  desires,  and  we  can 
readily  perceive  that  in  these  provisions,  together 
with  others  of  a  general  character,  to  which  we  shall 
hereafter  advert,  Nature  has  amply  guarded  against 
the  perversion  and  overgrowth  of  the  propensities, 
hedging  them  in  as  she  has,  by  so  many  circum- 
stances unfavorable  to  their  expansion.  Accord- 
ingly, we  find  that  animals  in  their  natural  sphere 
of  life,  are  generally  more  noble  in  their  natures, 
and  much  more  free  from  indulgence  in  the  grosser 
passions,  than  when  brought  into  an  artificial  condi- 


20  THE  EISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

tion  of  existence,  and  surrounded  by  unnatural  in- 
citements. Yet,  even  in  their  best  estate,  in  their 
mutual  intercourse,  however  simple  it  may  be,  clash- 
ings  of  interest,  or  promptings  of  opportunity  occur 
to  disturb  the  nicely  poised  balance  of  restraint,  and 
to  excite  the  energies  of  passion  to  vigorous  and 
destructive  activity. 

Thus  carefully,  then,  has  Nature  guarded  the  sus- 
ceptibilities of  the  brutes,  but  what  protections  has 
she  provided  for  man,  who,  as  regards  danger  from 
his  passions,  stands  in  a  vastly  more  exposed  and 
perilous  situation  ?  For  him,  scarcely  one  of  the 
natural  barriers  to  which  we  have  before  referred 
exists.  His  active  and  enlarged  faculties  ;  his  bound- 
less capabilities  of  imagination  and  feeling ;  his  ex- 
tended, complex,  and  ever-varying  social  and  politi- 
cal relations;  his  intimate  associations  and  intercourse 
with  his  kind,  with  their  various  and  controlling  in- 
fluences on  his  character,  involving  him  in  a  constant 
struggle  of  emulation,  rivalry,  and  antagonism  ;  his 
quick  and  powerful  appetites,  unrestrained  by  any 
natural  checks,  but  fanned  and  fed  into  ceaseless 
flame  by  artificial  and  irregular  modes  of  life,  by 
the  thousand  excitements  and  allurements  by  which 
he  is  surrounded,  by  the  desires  which  they  gener- 
ate, and  the  proffered  means  of  their  gratification, 
all  conspire  to  render  almost  impossible  an  equable 
or  tranquil  existence.  They  create  the  most  immi- 
nent danger  that  he  will  succumb  to  unregulated 
passion,  and  the  highest  necessity  for  safeguards  far 


OFFICE  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.  21 

snperior,  both  in  number  and  in  kind,  to  those  of 
the  creatures  below  him.  How  far  Nature  has  re- 
sponded to  this  necessity,  will  be  best  understood  by 
enumerating  the  more  important  of  the  protections 
which  she  has  provided. 

First.  One  protecting  influence  is  derived  from 
the  sensibilities  themselves,  in  the  counterpoise  of 
the  emotions  against  each  other,  so  that  the  strength 
of  one  class  of  affections  oftentimes  counteracts  the 
rising  violence  of  another  class.  Thus  anger  could 

o  •  o 

hardly  grow  inordinate  against  a  being  who  was  at 
the  same  time  deeply  loved,  reverenced,  or  pitied  ; 
or  whose  favor  was  necessary  to  be  acquired  or  re- 
tained for  some  ulterior  end.  These  influences  are 
common  to  both  man  and  the  brutes,  (though  affect- 
ing the  latter,  of  course,  to  an  inferior  degree,)  since 
the  mutual  intercourse  of  all  creatures  is  based  on 
their  common  sympathies,  necessities,  or  interests. 
In  human  society,  how  often  is  cruelty,  or  greed,  or 
lust,  restrained  in  its  inception  by  self-interest,  or 
pride,  or  some  other,  perhaps  more  honorable,  senti- 
ment !  How  many  severe  and  rugged  natures,  how 
many  selfish  and  depraved  hearts,  invulnerable  to 
all  other  influences,  have  been  softened  and  reformed 
by  the  gentle  power  of  companions  or  friends,  lov- 
ing and  beloved!  In  these,  as  in  other  cases  of 
opposing  sensibilities,  man's  social  relations,  while 
they  enhance  the  danger,  also  greatly  strengthen 
the  preventives  of  evil. 

The  sensibility,  however,  which  merits   special 


22  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

notice,  as  perhaps  the  most  important  of  these  checks 
upon  the  appetites,  is  fear.  In  all  creatures,  whose 
passions  crave  undue  gratification,  the  fear  of  con- 
sequent inconvenience  or  suffering  of  some  sort,  of 
retaliation  or  retribution  from  some  quarter,  operates 
as  a  powerful  restraint.  Even  in  the  lower  animals 
its  effect  is  marked,  but  in  Man,  with  whom  expe- 
rience and  forecast  have  a  distinguished  influence 
upon  conduct,  it  becomes  an  eminent  bulwark  of 
virtue.  It  is  to  this  that  human  codes  universally 
appeal,  and  it  is  through  this,  in  great  measure,  that 
the  Divine  law  enforces  its  authority.  For,  apart 
from  the  apprehension  of  punishment  in  a  future 
state,  experience  shows  that  morality  cannot  be 
sacrificed  to  passion  with  impunity,  even  in  this  life ; 
since  diseases,  pains,  and  suffering,  in  a  thousand 
forms,  follow  inevitably  and  naturally  the  violation 
of  Nature's  laws.  In  this  conspicuous  and  tremen- 
dous truth,  we  find  the  solution  of  the  mystery 
attending  the  presence  of  physical  suffering  in  the 
world  of  a  benevolent  God.  The  sensitive  nerves 
of  our  bodies  are  formed  that  their  exquisite  powers 
of  torture  may  keep  us  from  violating  the  rules  of 
health,  thus  to  secure  through  the  soundness  of  our 
systems,  the  mental  and  physical  preservation  of  the 
race.  Hence  the  physical  woes,  of  which  the  world 
is  full,  whose  wide-spread  evils  affect  even  remote 
posterities,  —  are  designed  to  warn  and  deter  man- 
kind by  an  appeal  to  every  natural  affection  and 
motive,  from  the  fatal  indulgence  of  the  passions, 


OFFICE  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.  23 

of  which  such  evils  are  made  the  inevitable  conse- 
quence. How  many  would  there  be,  temperate, 
continent,  or  cleanly,  were  not  the  frightful  fruits 
of  opposite  conduct  confronting  men  on  every  side, 
in  blighted  intellects  and  defective  bodies,  in  diseases 
and  death,  whose  flying  shafts  find  victims  among 
the  innocent  as  well  as  the  guilty  ?  Where  would 
be  the  civilization,  the  progress,  nay,  the  very  exist- 
ence of  the  race,  were  there  no  stronger  incentives 
to  purity,  to  industry,  and  to  mental  cultivation, 
than  to  filthiness,  ignorance,  and  sloth  ?  If  exist- 
ence, with  health  and  advancement,  be  a  blessing, 
and  cannot  be  so  without  these  conditions,  then 
there  can  be  no  more  real  benevolence  than  that 
which  seeks  to  prevent,  by  the  penalty  of  physical 
suffering,  the  far  greater  evils  of  the  debasement  or 
extinction  of  the  race.  Nor  does  the  fact,  that  the 
unoffending  are  often  involved  in  the  effects  of  guilt, 
offer  any  refutation  of  this  principle.  The  execu- 
tion of  human  laws  is  not  stayed,  because  it  will 
bring  affliction  and  distress  to  others  besides  the 
criminal;  and  it  is  the  consideration  of  this  very 
truth,  both  in  the  human  system  and  the  divine, 
that  keeps  men  back  from  crime,  who  might  other- 
wise think  to  brave  merely  personal  calamities,  or 
elude  them  by  self-destruction. 

Secondly.  A  farther  restraint  upon  the  appetites 
is  derived  from  the  intellectual  powers  of  man,  in 
the  suggestions  of  his  reason.  The  mind,  contem- 
plating the  passions  in  the  light  of  experience,  and 


24  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

under  the  conviction  of  its  own  high  nature  and 
destiny,  recognizes  them,  if  not  controlled,  as  not 
only  dangerous  to  the  individual  and  society,  but  as 
impediments  in  the  way  of  man's  advancement  to 
his  highest  development  and  happiness.     As  the 
dictate  of  reason,  therefore,  he  is  interested  to  re- 
linquish their  present  gratification  for  a  higher  good, 
and  even  to  engage  in  many  a  painful  struggle  to 
attain  to  their  discipline  and  conquest.     Upon  this 
principle  were  based  some  of  the  most  prevalent 
systems  of  ancient  philosophy,  and  even  with  the 
most  imperfect  reasoners,  something  of  the  same 
conviction  has  its  influence.     So,  too,  carrying  the 
principle  still  farther,  we  not  only  endeavor  to  con- 
trol ourselves,  but,  organizing  Society  in  order  to 
promote  the   general   progress,  we   make  laws  to 
regulate   those  who  will  not   exercise  a  due   self- 
government  ;  not  only  punishing  crime,  but  exclud- 
ing from  our  midst  the  sources  of  temptation  to  its 
commission.     Thus  reason,  rightly  employed,  ren- 
ders valuable  counsel  for  the  control  of  the  passions  ; 
yet  experience  has  shown   that   it   exerts   but   an 
imperfect  efficiency  over  mankind  for  virtue,  since 
human  tempers  are  in  general  too  gross  to  be  com- 
pletely swayed  by  its  refined  and  elevated  teach- 
ings. 

Indeed,  we  hardly  need  look  abroad  upon  the 
actual  moral  condition  of  man,  to  see,  were  there 
no  other  guards  over  the  human  passions  than  those 
we  have  enumerated,  how  inadequate  they  would 


OFFICE  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.  25 

prove  in  experience.  Beneficial  as  they  have  been, 
and  considerable  as  has  been  the  evil  they  have 
prevented,  how  small  is  the  relative  degree  of  their 
control !  How  vast  is  the  proportion  of  human 
folly  and  wickedness  which  would  break  over  the 
better  impulses  of  the  heart,  and  the  strongest  ap- 
peals of  reason  and  interest !  Nay,  how  often  is 
it  that  reason  and  self-love  themselves,  beguiled, 
blinded,  and  depraved,  are  enlisted  by  passion  in 
its  service,  and  do  battle  in  its  behalf!  Surely, 
He  who  had  so  carefully  guarded  the  half-formed 
appetites  of  the  brutes,  would  not  leave  man  with- 
out more  adequate  protection  against  their  untram- 
melled energies. 

Far  indeed  has  been  the  Divine  Author  of  man's 
being  from  overlooking  this  necessity.  With  spe- 
cial provision  for  it,  he  has  implanted  in  the  hu- 
man mind  a  new  and  wonderful  faculty,  whose 
express  purpose  is  the  regulation  of  the  mind's  in- 
ferior principles  ;  and  this,  the  most  important  of 
its  restraining  forces, — lying-in  fact  at  the  basis  of 
all  others  and  imparting  to  them  their  influence,  — 
occupies  the  governing  seat  in  the  soul.  It  is 
"  the  conscience,"  or  "  the  moral  sense  ;  "  a  faculty 
which  we  shall  hereafter  discuss  from  other  points 
of  view,  but  which  we  here  refer  to,  simply  as  the 
great  conserving  element  in  man's  mental  organiza- 
tion. It  is  this,  as  before  suggested,  upon  which 
repose,  more  or  less  immediately,  (at  least  for  their 
strongest  bearings  on  human  conduct,)  those  influ- 


26  THE  RISE  AND  THE  XF ALL. 

ences  of  control  to  which  we  have  already  ad- 
verted, —  affection,  fear,  and  reason.  But  its  direct 
action  on  the  mind  is  far  more  important  and  infal- 
lible than  that  through  any  subordinate  agencies. 
Unlike  these,  it  keeps  constant  and  vigilant  guard 
over  the  first  movements  of  the  appetites,  —  not 
•waiting  until  they  have  so  far  attained  mastery  over 
the  creature  as  to  be  planning  some  open  and 
flagrant  demonstration.  While  thus  watching  the 
germs  of  evil,  it  is  yet  not  incapable  of  grappling 
with  the  more  formidable  forms  of  passion,  but  en- 
counters them  with  a  potent  and  unyielding  resist- 
ance. Instinctive  in  its  nature,  and  independent  in 
its  judgments,  it  acts  with  the  rapidity  of  thought, 
and  with  the  force  of  a  divine  mandate.  Of  all 
the  mental  faculties  it  matures  the  earliest,  and 
though  by  a  long  course  of  opposition  and  neglect 
it  may  be  perverted  or  stupefied,  it  is  never  entirely 
blinded  or  destroyed ;  but  sooner  or  later  it  will 
start  from  the  dust  to  exact  against  its  betrayer  a 
terrible  vengeance.  Thus  the  soul  hears  its  admo- 
nitions and  obeys  them  alike  with  reverence  and 
with  fear,  —  its  still  but  solemn  whisper,  at  once 
breathing  the  Divine  affection,  and  suggesting  the 
terrors  which  it  reserves  for  disobedience  in  the 
agonies  of  remorse. 

It  may  Be  thought  that  we  have  overstated  the 
influence  of  conscience  as  a  natural  restraint  on 
the  passions,  inasmuch  as  among  races  or  classes 
destitute  of  moral  training,  its  teachings  are  neither 


OFFICE  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.  27 

so  powerful  nor  so  unerring  as  we  have  implied. 
Undoubtedly  man  has  more  capability  than  any 
other  creature,  by  education  or  habit,  to  affect  the 
development  of  his  faculties,  and  of  this  among  the 
rest ;  and  it  cannot  be  denied  that  he  may  become 
so  imbruted  by  barbarism  or  vice,  as  to  be  almost 
unconscious  of  any  better  nature  within  him.  So 
particular  tribes  have  their  reasoning  powers  so 
blunted  by  disuse  and  degradation,  that  they  seem 
little  if  any,  superior  to  the  brutes ;  yet  it  is  none 
the  less  true  that  the  intellectual  faculty  is  the  dis- 
tinguishing and  exalted  characteristic  of  man.  And 
it  would  also  be  wrong  to  say,  even  of  the  most 
hardened  votaries  of  vice,  that  they  are  quite  be- 
yond the  actual  influence  of  the  moral  sense. 
There  are  few  human  beings,  however  degraded 
or  depraved,  that  do  not  recognize  with  the  com- 
mon approbation  some  acts  to  be  emulated,  as  no- 
ble, generous,  and  just,  and  despise  others  as  to  be 
avoided,  because  they  are  base,  atrocious,  or  vile. 
Thus  such  distinctions  more  or  less  affect  their 
conduct :  but  it  is  not  merely  by  its  power  within 
the  individual  breast  that  this  faculty  operates  to 
repress  the  evil  outgrowth  of  the  passions.  Its 
influence  pervading  society,  gives  rise  to  laws,  how- 
ever rude  and  imperfect,  and  creates  that  right 
public  sentiment  more  powerful  than  laws,  which 
men  fear  more  than  death  itself,  for  who  dare  face 
the  conscience  of  the  World  ?  Even  the  moral 
sense  of  a  single  honored  friend  will  often  have 


28  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

more  strength  than  the  strongest  temptation ;  and 
men  whose  elevated  position  places  them  as  if 
above  the  control  of  human  influence,  —  nay,  even 
communities  and  nations  in  their  collective  capac- 
ity, whose  united  passions  might  seem  able  to 
create  a  sustaining  public  sentiment  in  behalf  of 
some  evil  course,  —  tremble  and  pause  before  the 
apprehended  verdict  of  a  distant  posterity ! 

The  conscience,  then,  the  moral  sense,  is  incom- 
parably the  strongest  influence  in  the  human  mind 
to  protect  it  from  the  excesses  of  appetite.  If  we 
doubt  it,  let  us  suppose  for  a  moment  that  this  fac- 
ulty were  obliterated,  and  the  distinction  between 
right  and  wrong  abolished  in  every  human  breast. 
Where  then  would  be  reason  and  the  kindly  affec- 
tions as  effectual  resistants  to  the  passions  ?  What 
would  there  then  be  to  awaken  against  temptation 
the  emotion  of  fear  ?  How  long  would  opposing 
laws  continue  to  be  enacted,  or  if  enacted,  ob- 
served ?  But  the  mind  refuses  to  dwell  on  the 
supposition.  The  imagination  shudders  to  contem- 
plate the  flood  of  horror  and  desolation  which 
would  then  sweep  over  the  earth  and  change  its 
face  to  the  semblance  of  Hell ;  before  which,  what- 
soever is  true,  is  lovely,  or  of  good  report,  —  every- 
thing which  gives  us  pleasure  to  behold  or  joy  to 
experience,  —  learning,  art,  civilization,  even  the 
race  itself,  would  be  swept  through  terror,  anguish, 
and  despair  into  inevitable  extinction. 

Thus  it  appears  that  when  the  Creator,  having 


OFFICE  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.  29 

organized  the  inanimate  universe  with  its  method 
of  forces  and  counter-forces,  and  formed  the  lower 
orders  of  animals,  grade  after  grade,  under  the  like 
system  of  impulses  and  checks  in  their  subjective 
and  objective  conditions  of  being,  came  to  create 
man,  he  constituted  him  upon  no  new  principles, 
but,  both  in  his  bodily  structure  and  in  his  psy- 
chological system,  in  pursuance  of  this  uniform  and 
well-considered  plan.  Even  his  distinguishing 
characteristic,  the  moral  faculty,  is  in  strict  con- 
formity with  its  requirement  of  a  regulating  and 
balancing  force  in  the  mind.  But  as  the  whole 
physical  and  mental  being  of  man  is  upon  a  vastly 
more  noble  and  perfect  scale  than  those  of  the  ani- 
mals which  preceded  him,  so  this  new  conserving 
force  is  of  a  nature  far  different  from  and  superior 
to  any  ever  before  implanted,  not  performing  that 
office  merely,  but  affecting  the  soul  with  other  and 
grander  influences  peculiar  to  humanity.  These 
peculiar  effects  and  influences  of  the  moral  faculty 
it  devolves  upon  us  now  to  consider. 


80  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

OF  THE  ULTERIOR  EFFECTS  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY. 

APART  from  Man's  moral  history  there  is,  as  we 
have  seen,  nothing  to  indicate  that  he  exists  under 
different  relations  or  laws  of  being  from  the  races 
which  preceded  or  surround  him.  Up  to  this  point 
we  have  viewed  him  simply  as  an  intellectual  ani- 
mal, —  the  latest  formed  in  the  historical  series,  and 
the  highest  in  the  ascending  scale.  We  have  re- 
garded his  moral  faculty  merely  in  its  aspect  of  a 
natural  curbing  force  on  his  passions,  and  as  such  in 
exact  correspondence  with  similar  provisions  in  other 
creatures.  But  when  we  come  to  consider  the  na- 
ture of  that  curbing  force,  the  new  relations  and 
responsibilities  in  which  it  involves  its  owner,  and 
the  other  ulterior  consequences  of  its  possession,  we 
enter  a  field  beyond  the  line  of  discoverable  analo- 
gies, and  exclusively  pertaining  to  Man. 

Of  the  nature  of  the  moral  faculty  or  conscience 
(of  which,  more  hereafter)  we  need  only  say,  in 
this  place,  that  it  is  \vell  defined  by  Webster  to  be 
that  "  faculty,  power,  or  principle  within  us,  which 
decides  on  the  lawfulness  or  unlawfulness  of  our 
own  actions  or  affections,  and  instantly  approves  or 
condemns  them."  We  have  already  discussed  the 


ULTERIOR  EFFECTS  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.     31 

identity  of  "  the  springs  of  action  "  in  all  creatures, 
and  seen  that  the  feelings  and  actions  which  they 
inspire  have  a  common  resemblance.  Hence  any 
pernicious  indulgence  of  passion  is  the  same  act  in  a 
brute  as  in  man,  and  is  attended  with  the  same  evil 
natural  results,  —  and  yet,  by  a  common  and  in- 
stinctive impulse,  we  view  the  act  in  the  two  cases 
in  totally  different  lights.  In  the  human  animal  we 
regard  it  as  abhorrent,  censurable,  and  degrading, 
while  in  the  other,  we  contemplate  it  with  no  such 
emotions.  The  reason  is  familiar.  The  moral  sense 
which  the  man  is  known  to  possess,  invests  the  act 
in  him  with  a  character,  which,  without  such  a 
faculty  in  his  breast,  it  could  not  have ;  and  we  intui- 
tively feel  that  it  is  the  possession  or  non-possession 
of  the  moral  sense  that  makes  the  act  in  the  perpe- 
trator criminal  or  blameless.  Thus,  through  the 
moral  faculty,  man  comes  to  recognize  the  unregu- 
lated movement  of  appetite  within  himself,  under  a 
new  and  revolting  aspect,  and  denominates  it  SIN. 

Much  obscurity,  and  confusion  has  arisen,  we  con- 
ceive, in  moral  and  theological  discussions,  from  a 
neglect  to  observe  the  distinction  between  the  ab- 

O 

stract  and  the  concrete  meanings  of  this  word, —  Sin. 
A  full  consideration  of  the  foregoing  principles  leads 
us  to  conclude  that  SIN,  strictly  speaking,  is  neither 
the  unduly  indulged  human  desires  or  affections,  nor 
even  their  undue  indulgence,  but  the.  criminality  or 
guiltiness  attaching  to  such  undue  acts  or  course  of 
conduct,  or  rather  the  criminal  or  guilty  principle 


32  THE  EISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

which  invests  them.  Thus  if  we  can  conceive  of 
such  undue  indulgence  under  such  special  circum- 
stances of  ignorance  or  other  exculpation,  as  divest 
it  of  its  criminality,  it  ceases  to  be  sin.  We  may, 
perhaps,  find  examples  of  this,  in  practices  common 
in  less  enlightened  ages,  among  even  the  holiest  of 
men,  —  as  polygamy  among  the  Patriarchs,  a  prac- 
tice of  intolerable  turpitude  in  a  Christian  age  and 
country,  but  which,  in  those  earlier  days,  did  not 
partake  of  sin.  So,  too,  we  speak  of  men  refrain- 
ing from  certain  pleasurable  acts  through  dread  of 
the  sin  involved  in  them,  and  of  all  men  as  tainted 
with  sin,  though  all  be  not  at  this  moment  engaged 
in  its  commission.  This  then  is  sin  in  the  abstract, 
or  that  which  gives  its  character  to  the  actual  deed. 
Sin  in  the  concrete  is  the  act  thus  criminally  charac- 
terized ;  and  is  the  voluntary  undue  indulgence  by 
a  moral  agent  of  any  of  those  natural  affections  or 
desires  which  are  common  to  all  created  beings. 
The  commission  must  be  by  a  moral  being,  and  must 
also  be  voluntary ;  because  without  both  these  con- 
ditions it  could  not  be  criminal,  and  hence  could  not 
be  imbued  with  the  character  of  sin. 

It  will  be  observed,  too,  that  the  undue  expres- 
sions of  emotions  or  affections  in  acts  which  become 
sins,  are  such  as  are  or  may  be  displayed  by  all 
creatures,  and  are  sinful  only  when  put  forth  by  mor- 
ally accountable  beings.1  Had  there  never  been,  and 

1  We  here  assume,  what  we  have  before  suggested,  that  every  sin  is 
resolvable  into  the  undue  action  of  some  natural  and  innocent  propen- 


ULTERIOR  EFFECTS  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.      33 

could  there  never  be,  any  such  over-indulgence,  ex- 
cept by  moral  beings,  and  so,  none  unattended  with 
sin,  the  distinction  might  be  of  little  moment  ;  but 
in  view  of  the  actual  history  of  all  created  beings, 
an  inquiry  into  the  origin  and  effects  of  sin,  finds  it 
a  wide  and  important  distinction,  and  one  that  should 
be  clearly  recognized.  $m,  says  Webster,  (though 
the  definition  is  applicable  only  to  sin  as  a  concrete 
term,)  "  is  the  voluntary  departure  of  a  moral  agent 
from  a  known  rule  of  rectitude "  ;  but  perhaps  it 
might  be  more  fully  expressed  to  be  "  the  voluntary 
neglect  of  a  moral  agent  to  control  any  natural  pro- 
pensity within  the  limits  prescribed  by  conscience," 
or,  in  other  words,  "the  voluntary  disregard  by  such 
being  of  the  admonitions  of  his  moral  sense,  prompt- 
ing to  the  due  regulation  of  any  natural  appetite." 
Hence,  it  consists  in  the  disobedience  of  the  moral 
sense,  and  cannot  be  predicated  of  any  indulgence 
of  passion,  however  gross,  extensive,  or  deliberate, 
where  the  moral  sense  is  wanting,  to  interpose  its 
light  and  remonstrances. 

Now,  while   it   is  this  disobedience  of  conscience 

sity.  This  is  not  only  sustainable  on  philosophical  grounds,  but  is 
sanctioned  by  Scripture  authority.  Thus  the  Apostle  James  (i.  14, 15) 
says:  "  When  lust  (ewieu/xia,  which  means  any  strong  desire,  generally 
used  in  the  New  Testament  for  innocent  desire)  hath  conceived,  it 
bringeth  forth  sin,"  making  sin  to  be  the  final  result  of  a  preexisting, 
and,  of  course,  innocent  propensity  or  affection.  ( See  Scott's  Commen- 
taries on  this  passage.)  As  an  illustration:  the  sin  of  doing  evil  that 
good  may  come,  where  the  inspiring  motive  or  desire  might  seem  to  be 
disinterested,  consists  in  the  indulgence  of  pi-ide,  in  preferring  our  own 
ideas  of  policy  to  the  plain  teachings  of  conscience  and  Revelation. 
3 


34  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

which  imparts  a  moral  character  to  the  commission 
of  any  act  of  passion,  it  is,  nevertheless,  the  act 
itself,  irrespective  of  its  moral  character,  the  pas- 
sions themselves,  thus  predominating  over  rational 
self-control,  which  bring  discord  and  suffering  into 
the  natural  world.  Such  evils,  it  may  therefore 
be  said,  are  the  result  of  passions  which,  as  devel- 
oped and  expressed  in  action,  are  indeed  sinful, 
but  not  of  their  sinfulness.  While  then  it  is  in 
one  sense  true  that  Sin  (i.  e.,  Man's  voluntary 
over-indulgence  of  appetite)  produces  human  mis- 
ery and  ruin,  it  is  no  less  true  that,  just  as  the  same 
evils  did  prevail  as  the  fruits  of  the  same  passions 
before  man  was  formed,  and  do  still  prevail  among 
the  inferior  and  sinless  creatures,  so  they  would 
doubtless  have  existed  among  men  to  a  still  greater 
degree  than  they  do,  had  the  turpitude  of  these  pas- 
sions continued  unrevealed  to  the  eye  of  a  moral 
sense,  and  so,  sin  never  have  become  an  inmate  of 
creation. 

It  will  not  be  inferred  that  these  remarks  repre- 
sent sin  in  any  sense  as  a  blessing,  or  even  as  the 
mitigation  of  other  evils.  On  the  contrary,  it  ap- 
pears that  Sin  itself,  even  in  the  concrete,  (man's 
actual  voluntary  self-subjection  to  appetite  against 
the  appeals  of  conscience,)  involves  the  soul  in  a 
degradation  and  guilt,  additional  to,  and  infinitely 
more  sad  and  fearful  than  the  merely  natural  evils 
which  result  from  inordinate  passions.  Sin,  there- 
fore, in  its  commission,  so  far  from  diminishing  the 


ULTERIOR   EFFECTS  OF  THE  MORAL  FACULTY.     35 

amount  of  evil  and  sorrow  in  the  world,  vastly 
enhances  it ;  for  it  adds  a  new  woe  to  the  natural 
miseries  that  spring  from  the  acts  to  which  it  apper- 
tains, and  so,  wherever  it  exists  as  a  realized  actual- 
ity, is  a  curse  and  only  a  curse  to  the  universe.  Yet 
the  origination  of  Sin  in  its  commission,  as  an  actual 
thing  is  to  be  distinguished  from  its  prior  origina- 
tion as  a  possible  thing ;  or,  to  change  the  order  of 
the  terms,  its  first  appearance  as  a  mentally  con- 
ceived abstraction,  from  its  first  appearance  as  an 
accomplished  fact.  And  we  shall  perceive,  with  little 
reflection,  that  while  the  latter  event,  effected  by 
Man,  was  a  dreadful  and  sorrowful  epoch  in  the 
history  of  the  race,  the  former,  prior  in  time,  and 
effected  by  the  Creator  when  he  conferred  the  moral 
faculty,  though  momentous  in  its  nature  and  effects, 
yet  tended  to  the  benefit  and  elevation  of  humanity. 
First ;  we  say  it  tended  to  the  benefit  of  humanity, 
and  in  a  previous  chapter  we  have  shown  that  it 
does,  in  fact,  immensely  promote  such  benefit  as  a 
curb  upon  unlawful  appetite.  Sin,  terrible  and 
hateful  foe  as  it  is  to  our  happiness  and  welfare,  is 
brought  to  our  view  and  comprehension  not  as  a 
hideous  yet  harmless  phantom,  powerless,  therefore, 
for  good  as  well  as  evil,  but  as  a  real  and  dangerous 
destroyer,  in  order,  doubtless,  that  both  by  its  de- 
formity and  the  reality  of  our  peril,  it  may  deter  us 
from  self-ruin,  and  promote  our  advancement.  Thus 
sin  in  the  abstract,  (by  which  we  mean  sin  existing 
as  an  object  of  mental  conception,)  like  threatened 


36  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

diseases  and  death  and  other  recognized  punish- 
ments of  passion,  is  designed  and  calculated  to  aid 
toward  our  permanent  and  highest  well-being,  and 
\vas  doubtless  for  this  end  introduced  as  a  possibility 
into  the  world. 

In  accordance  with  this  benevolent  purpose,  we 
find  the  moral  instinct,  which,  like  a  divinely  lighted 
beacon,  reveals  sin  only  to  warn  from  it,  exerting  its 
beneficent  office  in  every  human  breast,  even  in 
those  to  which  in  their  ignorance  and  darkness  its 
nature  and  its  objects  are  an  unregarded  or  an  un- 
fathomable mystery.  Though  greatly  assisted  and 
enlightened  by  the  revelation  of  man's  relations  and 
duties  to  his  Creator,  it  is  yet  not  dependent  on  this 
for  its  awakening ;  for  it  shines,  dimly  perhaps,  but 
really,  in  minds  which  never  heard  of  God,  and 
never  conceived  a  system  or  even  an  idea  of  duty. 
Every  man  recognizes  not  only  in  the  world,  but 
more  or  less  clearly  within  himself,  two  great  antag- 
onistic elements  or  forces,  in  constant  contention  for 
the  supremacy,  — "  the  law  of  his  members,  warring 
against  the  law  of  his  mind,"  till  the  agonized  soul, 
not  of  the  Christian  apostle  merely,  but  even  of  the 
uninstructed  Pagan,  exclaims  in  dismay,  —  "  Oh, 
wretched  man  that  I  am,  who  shall  deliver  me  from 
the  body  of  this  death  !  " 

—  "  Si  possem  sanior  essem, 
Sed  trahit  invitum  nova  vis :  aliudque  cupido, 
Mens  aliud  suadet.    Video  meliora  proboque, 
Deteriora  sequor."  i 

i  Ovid. 


ULTERIOR  EFFECTS   OF  THE   MORAL  FACULTY.      37 

Again,  we  say  it  tended  to  the  elevation  of  hu- 
manity, for  so  far  as  man  avails  himself  of  his  moral 
faculty  for  its  intended  purposes,  and  submits  him- 
self to  its  control,  it  exalts  him  in  the  scale  of  being. 
No  less  true  is  it,  that  when  he  neglects  its  use  and 
yields  to  the  cravings  of  lawless  appetite,  he  de- 
scends^ in  consequence  of  its  possession,  to  a  level 
more  degraded  than  if  he  had  never  been  capable 
of  moral  distinctions.  That  he  fails,  however,  so 
far  as  he  does,  to  use  it  rightly,  does  not  militate 
against  the  benevolence  of  its  design,  nor  make  it 
other  than  the  most  glorious  of  his  attributes.  That 
it  is  an  elevating  endowment,  indeed,  would  seem 
to  follow  from  the  very  fact  that  it  awakens  the 
mind  to  new  perceptions  and  powers,  and  thus  en- 
larges the  scope  of  the  human  nature.  But  in  addi- 
tion to  this,  it  opens  to  man,  through  these  new 
perceptions  and  powers,  the  loftiest  honors,  and  the 
purest  delights  of  which  he  is  capable.  It  places 
him  upon  the  same  high  stand-point  from  which 
God  himself  views  his  moral  creation,  and  there 
brings  him  into  communion  with  his  Maker,  and 
into  sympathy  with  his  plans.  It  raises  his  soul  to 
the  contemplation  of  those  infinite  subjects,  and  to 
participation  in  those  exalted  joys,  that  throng  around 
such  divine  revelations.  It  expands  his  mental  vision, 
to  take  in  a  new  Universe  of  Truth,  and  like  the 
celestial  inhabitants,  to  behold  its  great  and  radiant 
orbs,  wheeling  their  everlasting  circuits  about  the 
Right,  and  steadfastly  obeying  its  immutable  laws. 


38  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

To  no  eyes  but  to  those  endued  with  moral  percep- 
tions, can  these  sublime  harmonies  be  revealed ;  and 
his  will  be  the  highest  joys,  and  the  loftiest  eleva- 
tion of  soul,  who  shall  most  clearly  comprehend  the 
order  and  method  of  these  eternal  Systems,  even  as 
He  understands  and  rejoices  in  them,  who  presides 
over  their  perfect,  yet  often  mysterious  workings. 

It  appears,  then,  that  "  the  introduction  of  Sin 
into  the  World  "  was  a  blessing  or  a  curse,  accord- 
ing as  we  refer  to  one  event  or  another,  by  the  ex- 
pression. If  we  conceive  of  man  as  at  the  outset 
created,  and  for  a  time  continuing,  a  noble  intellect- 
ual being,  indeed,  but  like  all  other  earthly  creat- 
ures, destitute  of  the  faculty  which  distinguishes 
between  right  and  wrong,  then  we  imagine  a  world 
"  without  sin  "  in  every  sense  of  the  term.  It  is 
obvious,  that  whatever  might  be  under  such  circum- 
stances, his  course  of  life,  whether  he  should  pre- 
serve his  normal  purity  and  rational  self-government, 
or  become  like  the  brutes,  selfish,  grovelling,  and 
beastly,  still  like  them,  he  must  be  innocent, —  with- 
out sin,  because  without  responsibility.  As  his  obe- 
dience to  any  law  of  God,  whether  speaking  within 
him  by  the  voice  of  nature  and  reason,  or  uttered 
to  him  by  direct  revelation,  would  be  without  merit 
as  holiness,  so  his  disobedience  of  any  such  com- 
mand would  be  without  turpitude  as  sin.  And  so, 
neither  holiness  nor  sin  could  be  found  in  the  world, 
either  in  actual  or  possible  experience,  nay,  even  in 
possible  conception.  We  do  not  mean,  of  course, 


ULTERIOR  EFFECTS  OF   THE   MORAL   FACULTY.    39 

that  they  would  not  exist  as  recognizable  principles 
in  the  mind  of  God,  and  of  other  moral  beings.  We 
only  mean  that  they  would  have  no  place  in  the 
lower  world  as  actual  or  possible  facts  or  influences, 
— just  as  gravity  may  be  conceived  of  as  an  existing 
force  in  some  other  Universe,  and  absent  from  ours. 
Upon  such  a  creature,  let  now  the  moral  sense  be 
suddenly  conferred,  and  his  mind  opened  at  once  to 
the  recognition  of  right  and  wrong,  both  in  the  ab- 
stract, and  as  capable  of  being  illustrated  in  his  own 
thoughts  and  conduct.  It  is  apparent  that  imme- 
diately a  new  force,  influence,  or  principle,  is  brought 
into  the  world.  Sin,  as  a  possibility  in  experience, 
and  hence  a  reality,  to  the  extent  of  exciting  appre- 
hension, and  of  exerting  influence,  becomes  an  in- 
mate of  creation ;  and  this,  none  the  less  truly, 
whether  man  avoid  or  not  its  actual  commission,  — 
just  as  gravity  is  an  actual  force,  a  reality,  produc- 
ing effect,  (and  what  but  a  reality  can  produce 
effect  .?)  as  well  upon  the  balloon  which  overcomes 
it,  as  upon  the  stone  which  it  enchains.  Hence, 
even  though  man  should  still  hold  himself  pure  and 
intact  from  sin's  contamination,  yet  he  begins  to  re- 
gard those  natural  outgoings  of  passion  which,  under 
the  guidance  of  conscience,  he  resists  and  controls, 
as  the  innate  tendencies  of  his  nature  to  "  corrup- 
tion "  and  "  depravity,"  and  bemoans  their  terrible 
force.  But  though  the  applicability  of  these  sad 
terms  to  his  nature  is  thus  consequent  upon  the  re- 
ception of  the  moral  faculty,  that  new  gift  has  not 


40  THE  RISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

debased  but  exalted  him  in  the  scale  of  being  and  in 
the  means  of  happiness.  It  is  not  until,  in  his  weak- 
ness and  folly,  he  suffers  passion  to  override  the  ap- 
peals of  duty,  and  falls  into  the  actual  commission  of 
Sin,  that  degradation  begins.1  Then,  and  only  then, 
enters  the  curse  of  Sin,  and  to  a  vast  and  woful 
curse,  alas  !  has  man  allowed  it  to  grow,  notwith- 
standing the  immense  and  blessed  influence  of  the 
moral  sense  for  its  prevention  and  restraint. 

It  is  this  mournful  result,  perhaps,  thus  following 
the  conferment  of  the  moral  faculty  upon  mankind, 
which  has  tended,  more  than  anything  else,  to  ob- 
scure the  distinction  between  the  first  appearance 
of  sin  as  a  thing  comprehended,  and  its  first  appear- 
ance as  a  thing  committed.  And,  indeed,  (if  the 
distinction  is  fairly  borne  in  mind  to  prevent  confu- 
sion,) the  unhappy  fact,  no  less  than  a  correct  phi- 
losophy, will  justify  us  in  speaking  of  sin  as  being 
first  introduced  into  the  world  by  the  bestowal  of 
the  moral  sense ;  for  as  it  could  never  have  been 
manifested  in  man  without  that  previous  gift,  so 
it  was  then  that  he  began  to  feel  and  recognize  its 
presence  and  power  within  him  ;  and  finally,  its 
subsequent  prevalence  has  been,  though  not  by  a 
logical  necessity,  yet  by  historical  result,  the  conse- 
quence of  such  bestowal. 

1  See  Payne's  Lectures  on  Original  Sin,  p.  226. 


MORAL  FACULTY  DISTINCT  AND   INDEPENDENT.     41 


CHAPTER  V. 

THAT  THE  MORAL  FACULTY  IS  A  DISTINCT  AND  INDE- 
PENDENT FACULTY. 

THE  object  of  the  foregoing  chapters  has  been  to 
show  that  the  moral  sense  exists  as  a  part  of  man's 
natural  constitution,  subserving  a  necessary  and  use- 
ful purpose  in  his  animal  economy,  and  that  its 
presence  within  him  is  in  strict  conformity  to  Na- 
ture's laws  and  analogies  ;  also,  that  it  is  an  elevat- 
ing and  beneficent  endowment,  preventing  a  vast 
amount  of  sorrow,  suffering,  and  evil,  which  would 
otherwise  prevail ;  and  finally,  that  while  without  it, 
man  would  not  have  possessed  his  present  opportu- 
nities for  the  highest  progress  and  happiness,  neither 
would  he,  on  the  other  hand,  have  been  a  being 
capable  of  sin,  or  in  any  way  morally  responsible. 
We  are  now  prepared  to  enter  on  another  inquiry, 
namely,  —  Does  Philosophy  offer  any  suggestion  as 
to  the  period  of  Man's  career  when  he  was  first  in- 
vested with  this  noble,  yet  solemnly  momentous  gift  ? 

In  response  to  this  inquiry,  probably  the  first  im- 
pulse of  every  mind  would  prompt  the  answer  which 
accords  with  the  general  idea,  that  doubtless  the 
progenitor  of  the  race  received  the  moral  faculty 
at  his  creation,  as  a  part  of  his  original  constitution, 


42  THE  RISE  AND   THE   FALL. 

and  so  transmitted  it  to  his  descendants.  Scripture, 
perhaps,  would  be  appealed  to  in  support  of  the 
theory.  The  teachings  of  Scripture,  however,  will 
be  the  subject  of  future  examination.  That  they 
do  not  support  such  a  doctrine,  we  think  we  shall  be 
able  to  show.  We  are  now  seeking  the  intimations 
of  Philosophy  alone,  and  shall  attempt  to  prove  that 
if  these  do  not  (as  indeed  they  cannot)  establish, 
they  at  least  do  not  discountenance  the  supposition 
that  the  moral  faculty  may  have  been  conferred  upon 
Man  (that  is,  upon  the  first  or  representative  man 
of  the  race)  at  a  period  subsequent  to  his  creation, 
and  after  the  reception  of  his  other  mental  powers. 
If  we  recall  in  this  connection  the  fact,  that  in  every 
child,  other  mental  faculties  unfold,  in  a  considera- 
ble degree,  before  we  discover  the  conscience,  (z.  e., 
the  capability  of  distinguishing  the  moral  difference 
between  right  and  wrong,)  although  this  faculty 
once  awakened,  matures  more  rapidly  than  the  rest, 
we  shall,  perhaps,  perceive  in  the  outset  an  argu- 
ment of  analogy  in  favor  of  such  a  theory.  We 
shall  further  support  it  by  maintaining  three  propo- 
sitions, viz. :  — 

1st.  That  the  moral  faculty  is  a  distinct  and  inde- 
pendent faculty  of  the  mind,  not  growing  out  of, 
nor  necessarily  associated  with,  its  other  powers  ;  but 
separable,  and  therefore  capable  of  being  conferred 
at  a  period  subsequent  to  the  rest, — just  as  we 
might  suppose  the  faculty  of  sight  imparted  to  a 
blind  man,  or  of  reason  to  an  idiot. 


MORAL   FACULTY  DISTINCT  AND  INDEPENDENT.    43 

2d.  That  this  faculty  was  not  required  for  man's 
use  at  the  outset  of  his  existence,  and  there  is  there- 
fore nothing  improbable  or  derogatory  to  his  origi- 
nal nature  in  supposing  him  at  first  destitute  of  it. 

3d.  That  reasons  connected  with  the  moral  re- 
sponsibility which  became  imposed  on  man  through 
his  reception  of  the  moral  sense,  and  the  other  mo- 
mentous consequences  which  necessarily,  or  in  fact, 
hung  upon  it,  may  lend  strong  ground  for  an  in- 
ference that  his  Maker  would  prefer  to  impart  this 
faculty  to  man,  at  a  period  subsequent  to  the  recep- 
tion and  partial  cultivation  of  his  other  mental  powers. 

Of  these  propositions,  the  first  will,  in  this  chap- 
ter, receive  our  attention. 

The  theory  that  the  moral  sense  is  a  distinct  and 
independent  faculty  of  the  human  mind,  and  one 
not  capable  of  being  developed  from  its  other  pow- 
ers, is  one  so  generally  accepted  by  moral  philoso- 
phers, and  so  fully  and  ably  established  in  many 
works,  that  it  need  hardly  be  discussed  in  these 
pages.  That  our  argument,  however,  may  be  com- 
plete, we  will  endeavor  to  enforce  it  by  a  few  sug- 
gestions. 

1st.  The  moral  sense,  as  we  have  before  remarked, 
has  but  a  partial  resemblance  to,  or  connection  with, 
the  other  mental  faculties  in  its  development  and 
operations.  It  matures  more  rapidly  than  any  other, 
and  with  less  cultivation,  and  as  a  general  rule,  it 
survives  the  decay  of  all  the  rest.  We  would  not 
be  understood  as  asserting  that  the  conscience  is 


44  THE  RISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

totally  dissimilar  from  the  rest  of  the  mind  in  its 
phenomena,  or  entirely  independent  of  its  influences 
and  laws.  Yet  it  undoubtedly  does  act,  to  a  certain 
degree,  upon  distinct  principles,  and  in  a  manner 
diverse  from  the  other  faculties  of  the  mind.  It 
stands  apart  from  them  in  the  motives  which  it 
urges  for  conduct,  and  draws  its  arguments  and  its 
appeals  from  sources  exterior  to  the  man,  as  if  it 
belonged  not  to  himself,  but  were  the  embassador 
and  functionary  of  some  external  power.  Hence  it 
often,  nay  generally,  finds  itself  in  opposition  to  the 
other  faculties  of  man's  being,  and  though,  like  3, 
minister  resident  at  a  foreign  court,  it  is  too  often 
affected  by  the  influences  and  bribes  of  those  with 
whom  it  has  to  deal,  yet  there  still  remains  enough 
of  general  fidelity  to  its  mission  to  vindicate  at  least 
the  independence  of  its  origin. 

2d.  That  the  discernment  exercised  by  the  moral 
faculty,  or  the  distinction  it  recognizes  between  right 
and  wrong,  can  be  reached  by  it  alone,  and  is  not 
attainable  by  the  Reason,  is  another  evidence  of  its 
distinctness  of  nature.  This  distinction  is  one  so 
peculiar  and  so  unlike  any  of  the  deductions  of  In- 
tellect, that  not  even  when  clearly  perceived  and 
comprehended,  can  it  be  explained  or  illustrated  by 
the  Reason,  or  even  be  reasoned  about,  without  mak- 
ing use  of  terms  that  imply  a  previous  conception 
of  it,  and  which  are  incapable  of  definition  without 
such  previous  conception.  The  intellect,  indeed, 
pronounces  upon  acts  or  thoughts  simply  as  accord- 


MORAL  FACULTY  DISTINCT  AND  INDEPENDENT.     45 

ant  or  inconsistent  with  reason.  Single  deviations 
it  pronounces  errors  ;  habitual  and  systematic  aber- 
rations, insanity ;  but  here  the  intellect  stops,  and 
the  moral  sense  alone  is  put  in  requisition  to  affix  to 
such  errors  or  insanity  the  character  of  innocence 
or  guilt.  We  can  lay  down  no  series  of  premise 
and  inference,  whereby  this  distinction  between  right 
and  wrong,  even  with  our  present  instinctive  appre- 
hension of  it  through  the  conscience,  can,  without 
its  aid,  be  reached  by  the  other  intellectual  powers. 
Still  less  can  we  conceive  any  by  which  it  might 
have  been  by  them  alone  originally  discovered.  That 
the  unchecked  sway  of  the  passions  in  man  must 
be  a  source  of  disorder  to  himself  and  the  universe, 
and  that  true  self-interest  required  their  restraint, 
man  might  doubtless  have  perceived  upon  sober  and 
just  reflection.  Yet  even  this  conviction  would 
require  the  teachings  and  the  test  of  experience,  as 
well  as  some  previous  cultivation  and  practice  of  the 
reasoning  powers.  Even  when  attained,  he  could 
only  regard  it  as  the  result  of  speculative  conject- 
ure, or  as  the  deduction  of  logic,  which,  if  pursued 
further  or  with  more  acuteness,  might  have  brought 
him  to  a  different  conclusion.  How  conflicting,  im- 
perfect, and  unsatisfactory,  would  be  merely  intel- 
lectual searchings  for  moral  truth,  is  strikingly  illus- 
trated in  the  benighted  gropings  in  that  direction  of 
the  ancient  philosophers.  Centiiry  after  century, 
men  of  the  brightest  intellectual  powers  and  culti- 
vation, with  all  their  zeal  and  interest  to  discover 


46  THE   RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

new  foundations  for  peculiar  schools,  and  with  the 
light  of  the  natural  moral  sense  besides,  disputed 
and  doubted  whether  between  right  and  wrong 
there  existed  any  genuine  distinction  or  no.  Socra- 
tes and  Plato,  indeed,  seemed  almost  to  walk  in  the 
light  of  a  true  moral  and  spiritual  illumination,  yet 
even  these  discerned  their  way  but  doubtfully ;  — 
while  others,  though  with  the  benefit  of  their  teach- 
ings, could  scarcely  agree  that  there  existed  between 
virtue  and  vice  any  more  definite  distinction  than 
marks  the  difference  between  "  the  beautiful  "  and 
"  the  deformed." 

3d.  That  the  moral  sense  is  not  the  offspring  of 
the  intellect  further  appears,  from  the  fact  that  its 
movements  are  instinctive,  or,  in  other  words,  that  it 
acts  without  the  intervention  of  reason.  Indeed, 
necessity  requires  that  such  should  be  its  character, 
in  order  to  answer  its  design  as  a  conservative  force 
over  the  passions.  That  it  is  instinctive,  we  gather 
from  our  own  experience  of  its  movements,  and 
from  our  observation  of  it  in  children,  at  a  period 
of  their  lives  too  early  for  it  to  be  possibly  suggested 
by  the  reasoning  powers.  Nor  is  this  all.  We  see 
it  often  act  with  energy  and  influence  in  opposition 
to  the  efforts  of  Reason.  It  repudiates  the  conclu- 
sions of  logic  which  would  philosophize  away  the 
distinctions  of  right  and  wrong,  and  has  saved  many 
an  honest  soul  from  ruin  by  the  sophistry  which  he 
could  not  refute.  The  reasoning  of  temptation  may 
satisfy  the  intellect,  yet  there  is  an  internal,  an  in- 


MORAL  FACULTY  DISTINCT  AND  INDEPENDENT.     47 

stinctive  conviction,  which  rejects  and  defies  its  re- 
sults. That  as  a  conservative  power  it  needs  to  be 
instinctive,  is  plain,  when  we  consider  the  nature  of 
the  forces  with  which  it  has  to  do.  An  intellectual 
process,  however  conclusive,  would  be  useless  to  the 
soul  as  a  defence  against  the  electric  and  shifting 
attacks  of  passion.  While  bringing  out  its  slow 
machinery  of  premise  and  inference,  the  victory 
over  it  would  be  won.  The  instinctive  and  active 
appetites  must  be  combated  not  only,  they  must  be 
unremittingly  watched  by  a  sentinel  of  equally  in- 
stinctive vigilance,  —  one  that  will  start  at  their 
slightest  movement,  and  thunder  its  warning  voice 
in  the  ear  of  the  soul  with  the  commanding  tone  of 
Divine  authority. 

4th.  Another  essential  difference  is  thus  sug- 
gested between  the  conscience  and  the  judgment, 
in  that  it  speaks,  not  as  from  its  own  convictions, 
however  conclusive,  but  as  an  echo  of  the  awful 
voice  of  Deity  itself,  commanding  obedience,  enforc- 
ing it  thus  with  the  whole  weight  of  his  law,  and 
with  all  its  tremendous  sanctions.  Without  this 
idea  of  obligation,  there  might  be  such  terms  as 
"  expedient "  and  "  inexpedient,"  but  none  like 
"  ought  "  and  "  duty,"  ««  right  "  and  "  wrong." 
Even  the  direct  command  of  God,  enforced  by  a 
threatened  penalty,  could  not  suggest  this  "  duty  " 
of  obedience,  unless  addressed  to  a  moral  concep- 
tion.1 Man  might  submit  from  fear,  from  love, 
1  See  McCosh  On  Divine  Government,  p.  300,  &c.,  &c. 


48  THE  RISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

from  discipline,  from  disinterested  desire  for  the 
general  good,  or  from  all  combined ;  but  there  is 
nothing  in  these  that  resembles  that  controlling 

<J  O 

principle  of  action  which  prescribes  a  line  of  con- 
duct because  it  is  right,  regardless  of  consequences, 
and  though  neither  God  nor  man  should  ever  know 
or  be  affected  by  an  opposite  course.  Still  less  is 
there  anything  in  them  which  could  refer  back  the 
commands  and  laws  of  God  himself  to  an  abstract 
standard  implanted  in  the  human  breast,  by  which 
these  laws,  and  even  their  Maker's  character,  might 
be  judged.  Such  a  standard  there  exists,  not  pre- 
sumptuously established  by  man's  device,  but  fixed 
within  him  by  God  himself,  and  by  Him  appealed  to 
when  he  reasons  with  his  creatures,  —  "  Hear,  O 
Israel ;  Are  not  my  ways  equal  ?  are  not  your  ways 
unequal  ?  " 

These  moral  ideas  then,  clearly  as  the  mind  now 
receives  them,  are  attainable  through  the  moral 
sense  alone ;  and  the  perceptions  thus  acquired  are 
as  distinct  from  those  of  the  intellect  as  are  the 
discernments  of  physical  sight,  without  which  we 
could  have  no  realizing  conception  of  natural  forms, 
however  accurately  we  might  be  able  to  describe 
them  in  the  terms  of  geometry.  And  so,  even  as 
the  intellectual  faculties  may  subsist  in  the  high- 
est perfection  without  the  bodily  vision,  is  there 
equally  no  such  intimate  connection  between  them 
and  the  moral  sense,  that  man  must  necessarily  have 
received  them  together.  The  latter,  distinct,  sep- 


MORAL  FACULTY  DISTINCT  AND  INDEPENDENT.     49 

arable,  and  subsequent  in  order  of  action  to  the  other 
mental  powers,  depending,  therefore,  upon  them  for 
its  movements,  but  not  needful  to  them,  may  have 
been,  so  far  as  Philosophy  can  judge,  conferred  upon 
the  first  man,  (even  as  it  develops  itself  in  each 
of  his  descendants,)  after  he  became  a  reasoning 
creature. 

4 


50  THE   RISE   AND   THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THAT  MAN  HAD  NO  OCCASION  FOR  THE  MORAL  FAC- 
ULTY AT  THE  OUTSET  OF  HIS  EXISTENCE. 

IN  maintaining  the  possibility  that  the  moral  fac- 
ulty may  have  been  conferred  upon  Man  at  a  period 
subsequent  to  his  creation,  we  now  arrive  at  the 
second  proposition  in  the  preceding  chapter,  viz.: 
That  this  faculty  was  not  required  for  man's  use  at 
the  outset  of  his  existence,  and  that  there  is  there- 
fore nothing  intrinsically  improbable  or  derogatory 
to  his  original  nature  in  supposing  that  he  was  then, 
for  a  time,  destitute  of  it. 

We  scarcely  need  premise  that  in  this  portion,  as 
in  the  whole  of  our  argument,  we  assume  the  early 
history  of  mankind  to  have  been  truly  narrated  in 
the  Book  of  Genesis.  We  suppose  Adam,  whether 
the  sole  progenitor  of  the  race  or  not,  to  have  been 
in  the  outset  its  representative,  and  the  founder  of 
its  whole  subsequent  moral  condition  and  career. 
In  speaking,  then,  of  the  primal  or  original  state  of 
Man,  we  refer,  of  course,  to  the  primal  or  original 
state  of  Adam,  as  the  representative  of  the  race  at 
that  period.  Let  us,  then,  in  support  of  our  propo- 
sition, consider  for  a  moment  how  far  a  moral  sense 


MORAL  SENSE  AT  FIRST  UXSTECESSARY.  51 

could   have   been  requisite  or  even   serviceable  to 
Adam  in  the  dawn  of  his  existence. 

Let  us  suppose  him,  in  accordance  with  our  view, 
created  with  a  nature  in  no  way  differing  from  that 
of  his  descendants,  except  in  the  absence  of  that 
distinct,  independent,  and  separable  faculty,  the 
moral  sense,  —  a  creature  of  noble  intellectual  fac- 
ulties, suddenly  awakened  into  life  in  the  midst  of 
scenes  which,  to  his  fresh  and  vigorous  senses,  must 
have  been  so  strange,  so  exciting,  and  so  beautiful, 
as  to  long  absorb  his  whole  being  with  astonishment 
and  delight.  The  varied  and  transcendent  charms 
of  Nature,  with  her  ever  -  changing  aspect;  the 
movements  of  the  elements,  the  myriad  differing 
forms  of  living  creatures  about  him,  expressing  with 
their  thousand  acts  and  voices  the  joy  of  existence, 
and,  most  mysterious  of  all,  —  himself,  with  all  his 
faculties,  —  these,  and  all  the  questions  connected 
with  them,  were  ever  presenting  to  his  active  and  in- 
quiring mind  new  subjects  of  pleasing  contemplation. 

—  "  About  me,  round,  I  saw 
Hill,  dale,  and  shady  woods,  and  sunny  plains, 
And  liquid  lapse  of  murmuring  streams :  by  these, 
Creatures  that  lived  and  moved  and  walked  or  flew: 
Birds  on  the  branches  warbling,  —  all  things  smiled. 
With  fragrance  and  with  joy,  my  heart  o'erflowed. 
Myself  I  then  perused,  and  limb  by  limb 

Surveyed ; 

But  who  I  was  or  where,  or  from  what  cause, 
Knew  not. 

—  "  Thou  Sun,"  said  I,  "  fair  light, 
And  thou  enlightened  earth,  so  fresh  and  gay, 
Ye  hills  and  dales,  ye  rivers,  woods,  and  plains, 
And  ye  that  live  and  move,  fair  creatures,  tell, 
Tell  if  ye  saw, how  came  I  thus,  how  here? " 


52  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

Nor  was  he  destitute  of  companionship,  which 
might  add  to  his  enjoyment,  as  well  as  guide  and 
instruct  him  in  his  investigations.  Both  before  and 
after  the  creation  of  Eve,  the  society  of  his  Maker 
attended  him  in  his  daily  walks,  instructing  him  how 
to  dress  and  to  keep  the  garden,  bringing  to  him  the 
inferior  creatures,  and  informing  him,  doubtless,  of 
their  habits  and  dispositions,  that  he  might  give 
them  appropriate  names  ;  and  in  other  ways  which 
we  can  now  only  imagine,  paternally  imparting  to 
him  necessary  information  with  regard  to  the  earth 
and  its  inhabitants,  over  which  he  was  to  have  do- 
minion,—  teaching  him  the  facts,  the  laws,  and  the 
phenomena  of  that  great  kingdom  of  Nature,  whose 
ruler  he  had  been  constituted.  Day  after  day,  new 
discoveries  and  new  delights  crowded  the  hours  in 
this  intimate  intercourse  of  creature  wdth  Creator, 
his  growing  powers  expanding  to  an  ever-wider  and 
deeper  range  of  thought  and  intelligence.  In  this 
early  and  tranquil  period  of  isolation  from  all  so- 
ciety but  that  of  his  God ;  approached  by  none  of 
the  allurements  or  excitements  to  passion,  and  with 
the  cultivation  of  the  nobler  powers  absorbing  his 
soul,  it  is  inconceivable  that  the  protection  of  a 
moral  sense  should  have  been  necessary  to  Man, 
(especially  to  the  first  and  only  man,  and  during  the 
earlier  portion  of  his  existence,)  in  order  to  repress 
the  inordinate  growth  of  his  baser  passions.  Infi- 
nitely, the  greater  part  of  men's  follies  and  sins 
spring  directly  or  indirectly  out  of  their  connection 


A  MORAL  SENSE  AT  FIRST  NEEDLESS.  53 

with  human  society,  its  demands,  its  excitements, 
and  its  struggles.  The  wanderer  on  a  desert  island 
is  almost  inevitably  weaned  from  vicious  propensi- 
ties to  a  virtuous  life  by  the  mere  absence  of  temp- 
tation, and  so  much  more  must  the  first  man,  icjno- 

*  '      O 

rant  of  the  name,  the  nature,  or  the  experience  of 
evil,  and  resting  constantly  under  the  immediate 
guidance  and  supervision  of  his  Creator,  of  neces- 
sity, and  without  the  influence  of  a  moral  sense, 
have  preserved  the  elevation,  simplicity,  and  dignity 
of  character  with  which  he  was  created,  —  the  per- 
fection of  purity  and  innocence.  So  far  as  his  bodily 
propensities,  or  his  natural  sensibilities  were  con- 
cerned, there  was  certainly  no  call  for  an  instinctive 
and  powerful  check  upon  the  passions  ;  since  these 
were  amply  controlled  by  his  Divine  society,  his  rea- 
son, and  the  circumstances  which  surrounded  him. 

Equally  premature  would  be  the  possession  by 
man,  at  this  period,  of  the  moral  sense,  as  a  means 
of  mental  growth  and  development.  The  considera- 
tions which  we  have  just  advanced  against  its  neces- 
sity for  his  protection,  are  equally  applicable  here. 
Coming  into  the  world  animate  and  inanimate,  over 
which  he  had  been  constituted  the  ruler,  —  the  fun- 
damental injunction  resting  upon  him  "  to  subdue  " 
nature,  which  he  could  do  alone  by  the  study  of 
its  phenomena,  —  his  first  necessity  would  be,  as 
it  still  is  of  his  posterity,  to  bend  his  mind  to  the 
contemplation  of  the  natural  facts  and  laws  under 
which  he  was  to  live.  The  supervision  of  his  Maker, 


54  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

if  not  his  reason  and  circumstances,  would,  as  we 
have  seen,  amply  suffice  to  keep  him  in  the  path  of 
rectitude,  (were  there  any  opportunity  to  deviate,) 
and  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how,  with  his  ignorance 
of  the  future  experiences  of  life,  and  of  the  ques- 
tions which  they  alone  could  suggest,  his  intellect 
could  in  any  case  have  wandered  from  the  practical 
matters  before  it,  into  abstract  speculations  in  moral 
philosophy.  The  true  and  natural  development  of 
his  mind  would  be,  as  it  is  in  the  infant,  not  through 
the  study  of  moral  laws,  but  by  the  contemplation 
of  nature,  and  by  intercourse  with  superior  intel- 
ligence. Whether  moral  injunctions  or  principles 
were,  in  fact,  prescribed  to  him  at  this  period,  we 
shall  have  occasion  to  examine  hereafter.  At  pres- 
ent, we  are  only  aiming  to  show  that  they  need  not 
necessarily  have  been,  as  essential  to  his  mental 
advancement. 

It  would  seem,  of  course,  to  follow,  if  the  moral 
faculty  was  neither  necessary  to  primeval  man  for 
his  safety  and  innocence,  nor  requisite  or  available 
for  his  intellectual  growth  or  greatness,  that  the 
supposition  of  his  not  then  possessing  it  involves 
no  imputation  on  the  dignity  or  purity  of  his  original 
nature.  He  was  still  the  noblest  of  earth's  creat- 
ures ;  and  in  such  an  estate  of  mind  and  body, —  his 
whole  being  under  the  control  of  his  pure  and  just 
reason,  the  innocence  of  infancy  combined  with  the 
mature  powers  of  manhood,  —  as  he  walked  among 
the  reverent  brutes  in  the  superior  grandeur  of  his 


A  MORAL  SENSE  AT  FIRST  NEEDLESS.  55 

nature,  not  obscurely,  nor  in  his  aspect  and  relations 
alone  did  he  reflect  God's  image.  For,  unstained 
by  a  single  passion,  ignorant  of  the  name,  and  even 
or"  the  nature  of  sin,  his  spiritual  being  was  divinely 
spotless  in  its  purity.  Man,  thus  conceived,  — 

—  "  Erect  and  tall, 
Godlike  erect,  with  native  honor  clad, 
In  naked  majesty  seemed  lord  of  all, 
And  worthy  seemed ;  for,  in  his  looks  divine, 
The  image  of  his  glorious  Maker  shone, — 
Truth,  wisdom,"  innocence,  "  severe  and  pure." 

Without  the  moral  sense,  indeed,  there  could  not 
be  that  highest  form  of  holiness  which  grows  out  of 
the  struggle  with,  and  the  victory  over,  the  allure- 
ments of  evil ;  but  so  far  as  mere  sinlessness,  and  the 
normal  quietude  of  every  evil  passion  could  impart 
beauty  to  his  soul,  he  retained,  unimpaired,  the  per- 
fection with  which  he  came  from  his  Maker's  hands ; 
and  exhibited  that  innocence  which  we  now  behold 
in  those  only  whose  tender  minds,  inexperienced  in 
temptation  and  untainted  by  guilt,  are  as  yet  un- 
conscious of  moral  distinctions.  How  justly  to  man, 
such  as  we  have  supposed  him,  might  Hamlet's  pan- 
egyric be  applied  :  "  What  a  piece  of  work  is  man  ! 
How  noble  in  reason ;  how  infinite  in  faculties  !  In 
form  and  moving,  how  express  and  admirable  !  In 
action,  how  like  an  angel ;  in  apprehension,  how  like 
a  God !  The  beauty  of  the  world !  the  paragon  of 
animals !  " 

Had  man  then  continued  to  be  limited  to  a  sin- 


56  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

gle  individual  or  pair,  and  had  his  original  position 
and  circumstances  remained  his  permanent  condi- 
tion, it  might,  perhaps,  never  have  been  requisite 
that  he  should  possess  the  moral  faculty.  Amid  the 
few  perils  to  which  he  would  thus  have  been  liable, 
possibly  his  reason  and  the  Divine  society  might 
have  sufficed  for  his  safety  and  progress.  But  it  was 
not  purposed  to  confine  him  to  so  narrow  a  circle  of 
action,  thought,  and  influence.  Far  wider  relations 
and  spheres  of  life  were  intended  for  the  race,  and 
for  these  his  mental  constitution  was  not  yet  ade- 
quately furnished.  For,  tranquil  as  he  then  seemed, 
within  him  and  enwrapped  in  the  spotless  perfection 
of  his  nature,  were  the  slumbering  propensions  ; 
and  these  though  necessary,  and  harmless  as  yet, 
would,  as  his  Maker  could  well  foresee,  when  per- 
verted in  future  and  different  conditions  of  existence, 
and  strengthened  by  repeated  exercise,  unless  regu- 
lated by  more  efficient  guards,  overwhelm  the  re- 
straining Reason,  and  drive  the  beautiful  work  into 

o  * 

ruin.  Nor  was  this  all.  His  soul  was  intended  for 
higher  development  and  destinies  than  were  attain- 
able with  its  then  merely  intellectual  capabilities. 
Man  was  not  purposed  to  be  a  mere  reasoning  ani- 
mal, however  nobly  constituted,  nor  to  rest  in  mere 
intercourse  with  the  superior  intelligences.  He  had 
been  created  that  he  might  rise  into  communion  and 
sympathy  with  the  inhabitants  of  heaven,  yea,  even 
with  God  himself,  through  the  apprehension  of 
moral  truths,  with  all  their  elevating  and  inspiring 


A  MORAL  SENSE  AT  FIRST  NEEDLESS.  57 

influences,  and  thus,  from  sharing  the  divine  nature, 
be  qualified  to  enjoy  with  God,  and  like  him,  through 
the  ages  of  eternity,  a  life  resembling  his  divine 
and  spiritual  existence.  The  imparting  to  him, 
therefore,  of  the  moral  faculty,  before  his  primal 
state  should  be  impaired,  that  it  might  serve  to  pro- 
tect no  less  than  to  elevate  his  being ;  to  check  his 
appetites,  yet  not  prevent  that  liberty  of  action  essen- 
tial to  a  free  agent ;  to  guard  with  increased  securi- 
ty the  rank  into  which  he  had  been  created,  and  to 
promote  his  advancement  to  still  higher  dignity  and 
character,  followed  his  endowment  with  vitality  and 
a  reasoning  soul,  not  merely  as  a  work  of  benefi- 
cence. It  was  precisely  what  might  have  been  ex- 
pected, in  accordance  with  the  principle  of  progres- 
sive action,  invariably  displayed  by  the  Creator  in 
his  natural  and  moral  systems. 

It  is  true  that  the  grant  of  the  moral  sense  intro- 
duced the  possibility,  and  as  He  must  have  foreseen, 
•who  knew  all  things  from  the  beginning,  the  cer- 
tainty of  guilt,  as  wrell  as  holiness,  thus  exposing 
man  to  the  misery  resulting  from  wilful  sin,  no  less 
than  to  the  joy  consequent  on  voluntary  holiness. 
And  thus  the  inquiry  has  arisen,  —  "  Why  did  not 
God  make  this  faculty  of  such  a  nature  and  power, 
that  it  would  infallibly  deter  man  from  disregard- 
ing its  admonitions  ?  "  In  other  words,  —  "  Why 
was  man  made  a  free  moral  agent  ?  "  —  a  topic  upon 
which  our  plan  does  not  permit  us  to  enter.  We 
are  not  discussing  what  moral  system  God  might. 


58  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

or  should  have  adopted,  but  the  method  and  origin 
of  that  actually  established.  At  present,  therefore, 
we  must  assume  (what  we  think  susceptible  of 
proof,  and  partially  will  appear  in  subsequent  pages) 
that  the  plan  adopted  was  the  best  and  most  benev- 
olent, and  that  free  moral  agency  was  requisite  for 
man's  highest  happiness  and  advancement.1 

1  See  Stewart's  Moral  Philosophy,  Vol.  IL 


MORAL  AGENCY,  MAN'S  OWN  CHOICE.  59 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THAT  GOD  MIGHT  PREFER  TO  MAKE  MAN'S  MORAL 
AGENCY  THE  CONSEQUENCE  OF  HIS  OWN  ACT. 

WE  have  inquired,  in  the  last  two  chapters, 
whether  Reason  or  Philosophy  suggests  any  improb- 
ability that  the  moral  faculty  was  conferred  upon 
man  at  a  period  subsequent  to  his  reception  of  the 
other  mental  powers.  We  have  attempted  to  show 
that  no  such  intrinsic  improbability  arises  either 
from  the  nature  and  purposes  of  the  moral  faculty 
itself,  or  from  any  supposable  necessity  for  such  a 
faculty  to  man  at  the  outset  of  his  existence.  Con- 
tinuing the  support  of  the  same  view,  we  now  arrive 
at  the  third  of  our  preceding  propositions,  namely,  — 
That  reasons  connected  with  the  deep  responsibilities 
imposed  by  the  moral  faculty  upon  man,  lend  strong 
support  to  the  supposition  that  his  Maker  would 
prefer  to  impart  this  faculty  to  him  subsequently 
to  the  other  mental  powers,  and  to  make  its  acquire- 
ment the  result  of  man's  own  intelligent  choice  and 
voluntary  action. 

It  is  universally  conceded,  as  the  basis  of  every 
theory  relating  to  the  moral  system  of  this  world, 
that  it  originated  in  some  great  act  of  choice  by 
the  progenitor  or  representative  of  the  race.  What 


60  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

was  the  nature,  and  what  the  effect  of  that  choice 
on  this  representative  and  his  posterity,  have  in- 
deed been  the  subjects  of  endless  discussion  ;  and 
the  ordinarily  received  doctrines  on  these  points,  it 
will  be  generally  agreed,  are  invested  with  no  small 
difficulty.  But  that  the  present  moral  system  was 
ushered  in  by  some  voluntary  act  of  the  first  man, 
affecting  in  some  way  not  only  himself,  but  all  man- 
kind after  him,  is  recognized  as  not  only  taught  by 
inspiration,  but  as  consistent  with  reason  and  philos- 
ophy. Our  object  in  these  pages  is  to  ascertain 
what  that  choice  really  was,  and  to  show  that  in- 
stead of  being  what  the  common  view  represents 
it,  —  Man's  deliberate  descent  from  virtue  to  diso- 
bedience, sinfulness,  and  ruin, — it  was  simply  his 
choice  and  reception  of  a  moral  sense,  and  the 
engrafting  of  the  latter  with  its  opportunities  and 
responsibilities  upon  a  nature  previously  innocent 
but  ignorant  of  moral  distinctions.  In  subsequent 
pages  we  shall  investigate  the  proof  which  estab- 
lishes the  facts.  Our  present  inquiry  is  whether 
such  a  theory  is  intrinsically  objectionable. 

That  the  act  of  choice  thus  admitted  to  have  been 
made  by  man  shortly  after  his  creation,  might  have 
been  his  adoption  of  a  moral  nature,  has  been  shown 
to  be  at  least  possible  in  demonstrating  the  separa- 
bility of  the  moral  faculty,  and  that  man  might  have 
been  created,  and  for  a  time  left  without  it,  without 
any  real  deficiency  in  his  mental  power  and  dignity. 
This  being  so,  what  even  probable  reason  is  there  to 


MORAL  AGENCY,  MAN'S  OWN  CHOICE.  61 

believe  that  it  was  developed  in  him  simultaneously 
with  his  birth,  especially  when  there  seems  to  have 
been  no  opportunity  for  such  development  to  be 
manifested?  His  other  mental  faculties  were,  in- 
deed, created  in  him  in  a  state  of  maturity, —  ready 
for  immediate  use,  because  they  were  required  to 
be  used  immediately  in  their  full  vigor  and  strength. 
So  the  lower  animals  exhibit  complete,  at  birth,  such 
faculties  as  their  immediate  necessities  require,  while 
the  rest  waken  gradually  into  action.  Had  Adam 
had  no  immediate  occasion  for  the  employment  of 
any  of  his  intellectual  powers,  who  shall  say  that 
they  would  have  sprung  at  once  from  his  brain  in 
full  panoply  for  service  ?  Such  has  not  been  their 
mode  of  development  in  any  instance  that  has  oc- 
curred since  our  first  progenitor.  The  infant,  hav- 
ing no  urgent  need  of  their  immediate  use,  is  born 
with  a  mind,  to  all  appearance  blank ;  and  waits  a 
considerable  period  for  its  first  intellectual  concep- 
tion, —  still  longer  for  the  awakening  of  its  moral 
capacity.  The  possession  by  Adam,  to  any  degree, 
at  the  moment  of  his  birth,  of  mental  faculties  ac- 
tive and  perfect,  was  a  miracle.  Who  shall  say  that, 
unlike  other  miracles,  it  was  extended  so  far  as  to 
embrace  more  than  necessity  required  ? 

But  the  inquiry  relates  not  merely  to  the  time, 
but  also  to  the  manner  of  attaining  this  moral  sense. 
It  is  not  only  whether  man  might  not  have  acquired 
it  subsequently  to  his  birth,  but  whether  his  Maker 
might  not  have  chosen  that  he  should  come  into  its 


62  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

possession  by  his  own  voluntary  act,  rather  than  im- 
plant it  in  his  mind  without  his  own  consent  or 
agency.  An  affirmative  reply  to  this  inquiry,  we 
should  premise,  can  be  in  no  way  essential  to  our 
argument.  Should  we  hereafter  succeed  in  estab- 
lishing, by  proof  of  the  fact,  that  the  Almighty  did 
thus  leave  man  to  choose  between  a  moral  sense  or 
not,  it  can  be  a  matter  of  no  consequence  whether 
our  reason  would  have  suggested  such  a  course,  or 
can  see  any  sufficient  motive  for  it.  At  the  same 
time,  if  there  are  any  considerations  why  it  seems  a 
rational  and  natural  mode  of  inducting  man  into 
his  moral  station  and  career,  it  is  proper  that  these 
should  be  presented,  to  receive  as  much  weight  as 
they  may  deserve. 

Let  us  ask  in  the  first  place,  — Why  should  God 
not  leave  the  matter  to  be  effected  by  Man's  own 
act  ?  Certainly,  there  is  nothing  in  the  mere  na- 
ture of  such  a  supposition  that  renders  it  improbable  ; 
for  if  every  man  can  have,  as  he  doubtless  does,  the 
decision  of  his  own  eternal  destinies  as  a  moral  being 
confided  to  his  own  hands,  and  especially  if  the 
first  man  could  have,  as  every  view  supposes,  the 
determination  of  the  moral  nature,  character,  and 
career  of  himself  and  the  whole  succeeding  race, 
devolved  upon  him, —  why  may  he  not  be  conceived 
to  have  been  allowed  to  be  the  voluntary  instrument 
of  acquiring  for  himself  and  for  posterity  the  moral 
faculty  itself?  We  say  the  voluntary  instrument  of 
its  acquisition,  for  since  the  Creator  must  have  fore- 


MORAL  AGENCY,  MAN'S  OWN  CHOICE.  63 

seen  from  the  beginning,  that  man  would  in  fact 
become  the  moral  being  which  he  designed,  it  was 
only  a  question  of  modes,  and  not  of  results.  Neither 
is  the  idea  that  he  adopted  the  particular  mode  in 
question,  rendered  improbable  by  analogies  ;  for  it  is 
only  to  suppose  that  the  Almighty  pursued  his  ordi- 
nary method  of  accomplishing  his  purposed  changes 
in  the  history  of  mankind,  —  the  method  of  human 
agency.  How  otherwise  has  he  transmitted  his 
laws  and  revelations  to  the  world  ?  How  other- 
wise did  he  effect  that  most  awful  of  all  human 
transactions,  —  the  sacrifice  and  death  of  the  Divine 
Redeemer?  It  is  only  on  rare  occasions,  as  when 
he  would  destroy  the  race  by  a  deluge,  that  God  is 
seen  to  employ  his  own  direct  interposition  to  ac- 
complish his  designs,  and  even  then  he  makes  use 
of  human  agency  in  the  principal  feature  of  the 
event.  Admitting,  then,  that  man  might  have  re- 
ceived his  moral  sense  as  a  separate  endowment  after 
his  creation,  there  seems  no  reason  to  doubt,  but  on 
the  contrary,  good  ground  to  expect,  that  it  would 
come  to  him  upon  occasion  of  some  act  of  his  own, 
rather  than  without  his  own  assent  or  cooperation. 
But  there  are  other  and  stronger  considerations 
which  bear  upon  the  subject. 

We  have  seen  that  a  conscience,  though  not  req- 
uisite for  man's  use  at  the  outset  of  his  existence, 
was  yet  necessary  to  complete  his  nature,  as  a  pro- 
vision against  the  future  dangers  from  passion  in  the 
coming  circumstances  of  life.  Now  did  the  moral 


64:  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

sense  affect  his  state  and  relations  in  no  other  way 
than  would  any  mere  natural  instinct  answering  the 
same  regulating  ends  in  the  animal  economy,  there 
might  be  no  reason  why  it  should  not  be  implanted 
in  him  at  the  outset,  or  subsequently,  like  any  other 
endowment  of  nature,  without  his  own  choice  or 
agency.  But  such  is  not  the  sole  method  or  meas- 
ure of  its  influence.  In  the  question  of  its  posses- 
sion or  non-possession,  is  involved  the  momentous 
scheme  of  moral  accountability ',  by  which,  upon  his 
own  faltering  hands,  is  thrown  the  charge  of  his 
eternal  interests.  Nor  can  we  assert  that  this 
change  in  his  situation,  tremendous  as  it  is,  is  all 
that  was  involved  in  it,  —  since  we  can  have  no 
knowledge  under  what  conditions  he  might  have 
been  permitted,  as  an  intelligent  but  not  a  moral 
being,  to  inhabit  the  universe.  Had  we  definite  rev- 
elation on  this  point,  it  is  possible  that  thereby  the 
most  conclusive  reasons  might  appear,  why  man's 
adoption  of  moral  agency  should  be  his  own  act 
alone.  But  even  if  it  be  a  question  of  moral  account- 
ability only,  does  not  our  knowledge  of  the  Divine 
character  render  it  probable  that  God  would  devolve 
upon  man  himself  the  responsibility  of  the  change, 
rather  than  force  him  unconsenting  from  a  state  of 
innocence  and  peace,  into  one  of  such  momentous 
struggles  and  perils  ?  one  too,  as  the  Divine  pre- 
science must  have  foreseen,  of  his  certain  sinfulness 
and  woe  !  If  not,  and  it  we  are  to  believe  that  the 
transition  was  occasioned  by  the  act  of  God  alone, 


MORAL  AGENCY,  MAN'S  OWN  CHOICE.  65 

how,  in  view  of  the  certain  foreknowledge  just  re- 
ferred to,  could  it  ever  be  insisted  that  the  Almighty 
had  no  hand  in  the  introduction,  into  the  world,  of 
sin  and  moral  evil  ?  For  though  it  might  be  justly 
urged  that  man  alone  was  guilty  of  the  actual  com- 
mission of  sin,  yet  it  would  still  be  necessary  to  ad- 
mit that  it  was  the  Creator's  act  which  insured  its 
entrance,  and  thrust  man,  an  involuntary  victim, 
into  the  range  of  its  fatal  allurements. 

It  was  probably  in  view  of  such  reflections  as 
these,  that  one  of  our  profoundest  theologians  1  was 
accustomed  to  remark :  "  Only  show  me  God's 
right  to  create  a  moral  being,  and  the  rest  is  clear !  " 
There  seems,  indeed,  but  little  real  difference  be- 
tween the  placing  of  a  being  in  a  state  of  moral 
agencv,  the  results  of  which  are  certainlv  foreknoAvn 

O  *•     '  * 

to  be  the  triumph  of  sin  within  him,  and  the  actual 
introduction  of  moral  evil.  If,  then,  God's  justice 
and  benevolence  confessedly  require  us  to  believe 
that  he  left  the  latter  to  be  effected  by  man,  why 
may  not  equally  strong  reasons  be  believed  to  have 
existed  for  making  man  the  responsible  introducer 
of  moral  agency  also  ?  Why  would  not  this,  as  well 
as  the  other,  be  a  proper  subject  for  human  choice 
and  action  ? 

It  may  be  inquired  whether  the  same  considera- 
tions do  not  apply  to  the  question  of  creating  each 
individual  after  Adam,  a  moral  agent  without  his 
consent,  and  to  the  theory  that  Adam's  act  was 

1  The  late  Professor  Stuart  of  Andover. 
5 


66  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

made  to  decide  the  condition  of  his  posterity  in  this 
respect.  To  this  we  may  reply,  that  if  there  is  any 
such  difficulty,  it  is  one  incident  to  every  supposi- 
tion that  Adam  was  constituted  the  representative 
of  the  race  for  any  purpose  whatever.  It  is,  there- 
fore, a  difficulty  incident  to  every  conceivable  theory 
of  the  moral  system,  and  unavoidable  upon  any  in- 
terpretation of  Scripture.  The  only  question  we 
are  seeking  to  decide  is,  for  what  purpose  was  Adam 
thus  placed  in  a  representative  relation  ?  And  our 
aim  is  to  show  that  he  thus  represented  his  posterity 
in  respect  to  the  attainment  of  moral  agency, — 
the  acquisition  of  the  moral  faculty,  and  not  in  re- 
spect to  a  moral  ruin,  —  the  degradation  of  moral 
position  or  character.  Of  the  two  views,  that  which 
we  sustain  seems  to  us  the  more  rational,  at  least  in 
appearance,  and  less  open  to  objection,  as  we  shall 
hereafter  take  occasion  to  show  with  some  particu- 
larity. 

We  do  not  admit,  however,  that  there  is,  in  fact, 
any  difficulty  in  supposing  Adam  to  have  been  thus 
made  the  representative  of  the  race,  —  its  moral 
head,  —  in  any  manner  that  does  not  require  the 
entailment  upon  them  of  any  moral  responsibility 
for  his  personal  act,  and  that  affords  a  reasonable 
explanation  of  the  mode  in  which  they  participate 
in  its  consequences.  The  theory  just  suggested  as 
the  one  supported  in  these  pages  is,  that  through 
that  representative  act  of  Adam  the  race  entered 
into  a  state  of  moral  agency,  affecting,  of  course,  its 


MORAL  AGENCY,  MAN'S  OWN  CHOICE.  67 

moral  position,  relations,  and  history,  yet  not  identi- 
fying other  members  of  it  with  him  in  any  common 
accountability  for  his  acts  ;  and  it  exhibits  the  effects 
of  his  act  as  merely  those  which  passed  upon  his 
descendants  by  the  hereditary  transmission  of  natu- 
ral faculties. 

Having  thus  suggested  the  outlines  of  the  view 
which  we  are  endeavoring  to  sustain,  we  are  now 
prepared  to  examine,  in  its  light,  that  portion  of 
Man's  history,  which  will  form  the  subject  of  the 
remaining  pages.  We  have  just  considered  the 
possibility  of  Man's  being  permitted,  by  his  Maker, 
to  determine  his  own  moral  relations,  in  the  choice 
of  acquiring  or  not  the  possession  of  a  moral  faculty 
and  character.  We  now  proceed  to  show  that  this 
very  choice  was  fairly  set  before  him  soon  after  his 
creation  ;  that  this  truth  is  distinctly  disclosed  as  a 
historical  fact  by  Revelation,  and  that  the  third 
chapter  of  Genesis,  commonly  supposed  to  reveal  a 
FALL  of  Man  from  a  state  of  conscious  holiness  and 
consequent  happiness  to  an  opposite  one  of  sinful 
corruption  and  consequent  misery,  is  of  an  entirely 
different  purport;  narrating,  in  fact,  his  PROGRES- 
SION and  ELEVATION  from  the  condition  of  an  inno^ 
cent  but  not  a  moral  being,  to  the  rank  of  a  moral 
agent,  by  his  own  free  choice  and  action. 


PART  II. 

THE  DISCLOSURES  OF  EEVELATION. 


KOTE. 

THE  account  of  Man's  creation  and  history  in  the  Garden  of  Eden, 
which  is  examined  in  the  following  pages,  is  contained  in  the  first, 
second,  and  third  chapters  of  Genesis.  For  convenience  of  reference 
the  narrative  is  appended  complete  at  the  end  of  the  volume. 


PART  II. 

THE  DISCLOSURES  OF  REVELATION. 

CHAPTER  I. 

MAN'S  CREATION  AS  A  MORAL   BEING  NOT  ASSERTED 
IN  REVELATION. 

IN  an  examination  of  the  record  in  Genesis,  for 
the  purposes  we  have  mentioned,  it  would  be  irrele- 
vant to  discuss  the  historical  origin  or  literary  char- 
acter of  the  Document.  Whether  Moses  was  its 
author  or  merely  its  compiler  ;  from  what  source  he 
procured  his  information  or  materials ;  whether  it  is 
of  single  or  of  fragmentary  origin,  and  whether  in- 
tended as  a  literal  or  an  allegorical  relation,  we  need 
not  stop  to  consider.  However  any  of  these  ques- 
tions may  be  answered,  it  will  not  affect  its  nature 
or  authority  as  an  inspired  revelation,  disclosing 
under  some  guise  or  other  the  origin  of  the  human 
race,  and  the  manner  of  its  entrance  into  its  pres- 
ent moral  relations.  Whether  a  myth,  therefore, 
or  a  history,  we  are  justified  in  scrutinizing  closely 
its  every  statement  and  feature,  in  order  that  we 
may  correctly  apprehend  its  purport. 

Our  plan  will  lead  us  first  to  inquire  what  light 


72  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

is  afforded  by  the  narrative,  and  by  other  portions 
of  Scripture,  upon  the  primitive  character  of  man. 
We  shall  examine  whether,  as  is  commonly  taught, 
they  reveal  that  he  was,  at  the  outset  of  his  exist- 
ence, a  moral  being ;  whether  he  was  created  holy, 
(as  implying  a  moral  agency  and  a  voluntary  course 
of  moral  rectitude,)  and  so  continued  until  he  wil- 
fully, criminally,  and  recklessly  abandoned  this  high 
and  happy  state  to  plunge  into  sinfulness  and  mis- 
ery ;  or  whether,  on  the  other  hand,  and  as  we  shall 
attempt  to  show,  they  teach  the  following  as  the 
facts  concerning  him  :  —  That  he  was  created  sim- 
ply a  noble  and  pure  intellectual  being,  with  a  char- 
acter stainless  indeed,  but  in  no  sense  holy,  being 
like  that  of  the  brute,  or  the  infant,  unattended  by 
a  moral  sense  ;  that  he  afterward  voluntarily  ac- 
quired this  moral  sense  by  an  act  of  some  kind, 
represented  in  the  story  as  a  partaking  of  forbidden 
fruit ;  that  this  act,  however,  being  committed  prior 
to  that  acquisition,  and  hence,  before  he  became  a 
moral  agent,  was  not  in  itself  sinful,  and  did  not 
necessarily  render  him  so,  but  only  capable  of  sinful- 
ness,  and  of  holiness,  as  well ;  that  by  this  act,  in 
itself  considered,  therefore,  his  original  nature  was 
in  no  way  altered,  except  as  it  was  enlarged,  en- 
lightened, and  elevated,  by  the  new  faculty  acquired  ; 
and  that  his  condition  was  thus  simply  changed,  to- 
gether with  that  of  his  posterity  in  him,  from  the 
condition  of  moral  irresponsibility,  to  that  of  free 
but  accountable  moral  agency. 


WHAT  SCRIPTURE  DOES  NOT  TEACH.  73 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  idea  of  man's  original 
holiness  has  no  other  foundation  whatever  in  the 
Scriptural  account  of  his  creation,  than  what  may 
be  inferred  from  the  general  and  indefinite  state- 
ment that  he  was  "  created  in  the  image  of  God." 
Yet  there  is  nothing  in  this  expression,  or  in  the 
context  which  is  plainly  explanatory  of  it,  that  inti- 
mates any  other  resemblance  than  that  involved  in 
physical  and  intellectual  excellence,  carrying  with  it 
preeminence  and  dominion  over  the  lower  creatures. 

The  passage  is  as  follows  :  — 

"  And  God  said  let  us  make  man  (ADAM)  in  our  own  im- 
age, after  our  likeness  :  and  let  them  have  dominion  over  the 
fish  of  the  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over  the 
cattle,  and  over  all  the  earth,  and  over  every  creeping  thing 
that  creepeth  upon  the  earth.  So  God  created  man  (ADAM) 
in  his  own  image,  in  the  image  of  God  created  he  him :  male 
and  female  created  he  them.  And  God  blessed  them,  and 
God  said  unto  them,  Be  fruitful,  and  multiply,  and  replenish 
the  earth,  and  subdue  it :  and  have  dominion  over  the  fish  of 
the  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over  every  living 
thing  that  moveth  upon  the  earth."  (Genesis  i.  26-28.) 

Here  the  whole  purport  of  the  passage  plainly  is, 
that  "  the  image  of  God  "  wherein  man  was  made, 
consisted  in  his  physical  and  mental  preeminence 
merely,  and  this  (as  Professor  Bush  admits  in  his 
"  Notes  on  Genesis  ")  is,  without  doubt,  its  primary 
sense.  The  same  figure  is  used  in  application  to 
man,  in  other  parts  of  Scripture,  where  it  refers  to 
his  present  nature  and  condition.  Thus,  (Genesis  ix. 
6,)  —  "  Whoso  sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man  shall 


74  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

his  blood  be  shed,  for  in  the  image  of  God  made  he 
man  ;  "  which  reason  would  have  no  force,  were  not 
the  image  still  subsisting ;  and  again,  St.  James, 
speaking  of  the  tongue,  says:  "Therewith  curse  we 
men  which  are  made  after  the  similitude  of  God." 
From  these  instances,  it  is  evident  that  the  descrip- 
tion is  applied  in  Scripture  without  reference  to 
moral  resemblance.  Nor  is  this  surprising ;  for 
surely  there  are  points  of  resemblance  in  man's 
natural  constitution,  sufficient  to  justify  the  figure  in 
reference  to  that  alone.  Let  us  quote  the  remarks 
of  one  sufficiently  able,  learned,  and  orthodox,  to 
make  his  views  weighty  with  authority :  — l 

"  Man  is  the  great  creature  worker  of  the  world,  —  its  one 
created  being  that,  taking  up  the  work  of  the  adorable  Crea- 
tor, carries  it  on  to  higher  results  and  nobler  developments,  and 
finds  a  field  for  his  persevering  ingenuity  and  skill  in  every 
province  in  which  his  Maker  had  expatiated  before  him.  He 
is  evidently  (to  adopt  and  modify  the  remark  of  Oken)  '  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh.' "  .  .  .  .  "I  must  hold  that  we  receive 
the  true  explanation  of  the  man-like  character  of  the  Creator's 
workings  ere  man  was,  in  the  remarkable  text  in  which  we 

are  told  that '  God  made  Man  in  his  own  image.' " "As 

a  geometrician,  as  an  arithmetician,  as  a  chemist,  as  an  astron- 
omer, in  short,  in  all  the  departments  of  what  are  known  as 
the  strict  sciences,  man  differs  from  his  Maker,  not  in  kind  but 
in.  degree,  —  not  as  matter  differs  from  mind,  or  darkness 
from  light,  but  simply  as  a  mere  portion  of  space  or  time  differs 
from  all  space  and  all  time."  And  he  adds  that  not  merely  in 
mechanical  capabilities,  but  as  well  in  the  musical  and  poeti- 
cal faculty,  "  we  bear  the  stamp  and  impress  of  the  Divine  im- 
age." 2 

1  Hugh  Miller,  Testimony  of  the  Rocks,  p.  239.  2  ]Ud.  p.  259. 


WHAT  SCRIPTURE  DOES  NOT  TEACH.  75 

If  this  is  true  of  human  nature  as  it  is,  with  how 
much  greater  force  might  it  be  said  of  man  in  his 
normal  state  of  intellectual  perfection,  that,  without 
reference  to  a  moral  constitution,  he  was  made  in 
the  image  and  likeness  of  God.  In  the  passage  of 
Genesis  just  quoted,  it  is  remarkable  that  so  general 
an  epitome  of  man's  qualities  and  prerogatives,  and 
of  his  points  of  superiority  over  the  antecedent 
creatures,  should  not  contain  a  word  in  allusion  to 
the  all-important  and  essential  distinction  between 
him  and  them  of  a  moral  nature.  Had  that  distinc- 
tion existed,  it  would  undoubtedly  have  been  referred 
to,  and  hence  it  is  going  too  far,  especially  when 
there  is  nothing  in  the  force  of  the  Hebrew  itself  to 
favor  the  interpretation,  to  infer  a  moral  character 
in  man,  from  the  expression  we  have  quoted. 

Accordingly,  few  commentators  will  claim  to  de- 
duce from  the  phrase  in  question  (if  it  can  be  sup- 
posed to  imply  anything  with  regard  to  man's  moral 
character)  any  more  than  the  doctrine  that  he  was 
created  with  a  pure  and  innocent  nature,  untainted 
by  depravity  or  sin.  Such  a  character,  as  we  have 
heretofore  seen,  would  amply  justify  the  application 
to  him  of  the  figurative  description,  —  "  image  of 
God."  We  say  the  figurative  description,  for  it 
cannot  be  supposed  that  such  language  is  other  than 
figurative,  since  it  is  impossible  that  man  in  any 
conceivable  state  could  be  literally  "  the  image  of 
God,"  (i.  e.,  his  reproduction  in  miniature,)  with  all 
the  attributes  of  Deity ;  and  if  he  could  not,  then 


76  THE  RISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

the  expression  we  are  considering  need  not  neces- 
sarily imply  the  possession  of  God's  moral  faculties, 
any  more  than  of  his  omniscience,  omnipresence,  or 
other  qualities  of  his  being.  Even  with  the  pres- 
ence of  the  moral  sense,  man  would  not  be  the  real 
image  of  God ;  for  as  Scott,  in  his  commentaries,  truly 
observes,  —  "Conscience,  will,  and  understanding, 
do  not  compose  God's  image,  since  fallen  angels  have 
the  same."  Nor,  as  we  have  already  seen,  would 
the  absence  of  this  moral  sense  in  the  outset  of  man's 
existence,  destroy  the  likeness,  or  imply  any  imper- 
fection in  his  nature.  In  the  situation  in  which  he 
at  first  found  himself,  under  the  immediate  care  of 
his  Creator,  with  nothing  to  call  his  passions  into 
play,  a  conscience  and  moral  sense  were  as  useless 
to  him  as  to  the  brutes.  How  often  are  we  our- 
selves in  circumstances  where,  absorbed  in  the  inter- 
est of  our  situation,  happy  and  self-forgetful,  our 
moral  faculties  lie  inactive,  and  without  our  being 
conscious  of  their  existence  !  It  is  no  derogation, 
therefore,  from  man's  high  rank  and  dignity  at  the 
outset,  to  suppose  him  originally  "  destitute  of  fac- 
ulties which  he  did  not  require,"1  and  the  total  ab- 
sence of  all  allusion  to  such  faculties  in  any  part  of 
the  story  of  his  creation,  primitive  state,  and  his- 
tory, the  very  place  where  we  should  look  for  such 
information,  is  at  least  a  strong  presumptive  argu- 
ment that  he  did  not  then  possess  them. 

As  two  or  three  passages,  however,  from  other 

l  Bishop  Butler. 


WHAT  SCRIPTURE  DOES  NOT   TEACH.  77 

portions  of  Scripture,  are  usually  cited  in  support 
of  the  doctrine  of  man's  primitive  holiness,  it  is 
proper  that  we  should  notice  them  here.  They  are 
the  following :  — 

"  Behold,  tins  have  I  found,  saith  the  preacher,  counting 
one  by  one  to  find  out  the  account :  which  yet  my  soul  seek- 
eth,  but  I  find  not :  one  man  among  a  thousand  have  I  found ; 
but  a  woman  among  all  those  have  I  not  found.  Lo,  this 
only  have  I  found,  that  God  hath  made  man  *  upright ;  but 
they  have  sought  out  many  inventions."  (Ecclesiastes  vii. 
27-29.) 

"  That  ye  put  off  concerning  the  former  conversation  the 
old  man,  which  is  corrupt  according  to  the  deceitful  lusts ;  and 
be  renewed  in  the  spirit  of  your  mind ;  and  that  ye  put  on 
the  new  man,  which  after  God  is  created  in  righteousness  and 
true  holiness  (OCMTTITI  TIJC  uhrideiaf,  i.  e.,  holiness  of  the  truth). 
(Ephesians  iv.  22-24.) 

"  Lie  not  one  to  another,  seeing  that  ye  have  put  off  the 
old  man  with  his  deeds  ;  and  have  put  on  the  new  man,  which 
is  renewed  in  knowledge  after  the  image  of  him  that  created 
him."  (Colossians  iii.  9,  10.) 

As  regards  the  first  of  these  passages,  (that  from 
Ecclesiastes,)  it  will  hardly  be  claimed  to  assert 
anything  more  than  man's  native  innocence,  and  that 
his  natural  uprightness  in  his  actual  rather  than  in 
his  primeval  state.  For  the  Preacher  expressly 
declares  his  conviction  to  be  the  result  of  his  own 
observation  and  reason  applied  to  his  contemporaries, 
(verse  27,)  "  counting  one  by  one  to  find  out  the 
account ;  "  or,  as  the  margin  gives  it,  "  weighing  one 

1  The  word  "  man,"  in  this  passage,  is  accompanied  by  the  article, 
and  should  be  taken  genetically,  as  "  men,"  or  "  mankind."  (Stuart.) 


78  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

thing  after  another  to  find  out  the  reason."  What- 
ever value,  therefore,  may  be  attached  to  Solomon's 
observation  of  human  nature,  as  it  is,  this  passage 
affords  no  divine  explanation  respecting  its  original 
character. 

Nor  will  the  exhortations  of  Paul  be  found  any 
more  relevant  to  this  discussion.  They  are  merely 
appeals  to  his  hearers  to  forsake  their  former  worldly 
manner  of  life,  for  the  new  standard  of  holiness 
which  Christ's  example  afforded.  That  he  should 
refer  to  that  example  by  the  natural  figure  "  image 
of  God,"  is  of  no  more  importance  in  this  argument 
than  his  use  of  the  same  expression  in  1  Corinthians 
xi.  7,  — "  For  a  man,  indeed,  ought  not  to  cover  his 
head,  forasmuch  as  he  is  the  image  and  glory  of  God  : 
but  the  woman  is  the  glory  of  the  man."  Indeed,  the 
very  phrase  "  new  man,"  which  Paul  makes  use  of, 
indicates  that  he  made  no  allusion  to  man's  original 
nature,  since  to  put  on  that,  would  be  to  assume  an 
older  man  (or  nature)  than  that  which  he  was  urg- 
ing to  forsake.  We  shall  have  occasion  to  show, 
hereafter,  that  upon  our  view  of  man's  successive 
steps  in  moral  growth,  from  moral  ignorance  up  to 
moral  perfection,  these  figures  of  the  Apostle  in 
illustration  of  the  Christian  nature,  have  a  peculiar 
fitness  and  power,  far  beyond  that  which  the  com- 
mon interpretation  affords  them. 

It  will  appear  strange  to  those  who  are  new  to  this 
discussion,  to  be  told  that  we  have  now  exhausted 
the  entire  Scriptural  authority  for  the  important 


WHAT  SCRIPTURE  DOES  NOT   TEACH.  79 

doctrine  of  man's  primitive  holiness,  righteousness, 
or  rectitude,  as  a  moral  being.  Its  insufficiency 
to  sustain  such  a  doctrine  must  be  obvious  ;  nor,  in- 
deed, does  it  even  appear  that  the  sacred  writers 
we  have  quoted  had  ever  conceived  such  an  idea. 
Whatever  may  have  been  their  individual  belief, 
however,  certain  it  is  that,  while  their  pens  were 
guided  by  inspiration,  they  have  not  suggested  it. 
All  that  can  be  gathered  from  them  as  authorities, 
is  clearly  the  same  general  view  which  is  expressed 
by  the  Psalmist  in  that  sublime  apostrophe  to  Deity, 
wherein  referring  to  man,  (like  the  writers  we  have 
already  cited,)  not  in  his  original  state,  but  as  he 
actually  exists,  he  exclaims,  with  mingled  awe  of 
the  Creator  and  admiration  of  his  work,  — 

"  Wliat  is  man,  that  thou  art  mindful  of  him, 
And  the  Son  of  Man,  that  thou  visitest  him  V 
For  thou  hast  made  him  a  little  lower  than  the  angels ; 
Thou  hast  crowned  him  with  glory  and  honor ! 
Thou  madest  him  to  have  dominion  over  the  work  of  thy  hands; 
Thou  hast  put  all  things  under  his  feet ! 
All  sheep  and  oxen,  yea,  and  the  beasts  of  the  field ; 
The  fowl  of  the  air,  and  the  fish  of  the  seas, 
And  whatsoever  passeth  through  the  path  of  the  seas !  " 

But  it  is  not  merely  by  omissions,  and  by  silence, 
that  the  doctrine  of  man's  original  moral  agency 
and  holiness  is  disproved  by  the  Scriptures.  The 
narrative  we  are  considering,  when  farther  exam- 
ined, will  be  found  to  supply  frequent  and  powerful 
proofs  against  such  a  view,  and  to  them  we  will  now 
direct  our  attention. 


80  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  H. 

INDIRECT  EVIDENCE  THAT  MAN  WAS  NOT  ORIGINALLY 
A  MORAL  BEING,  — DRAWN  FROM  THE  ACCOUNT  OF 
HIS  CREATION  AND  PRIMITIVE  HISTORY. 

LET  us  suppose,  if  we  can,  that  this  story  of  Adam 
and  Eve  had  relation  to  two  creatures  of  another 
sphere,  or  of  a  former  and  extinct  race :  creatures 
who  disappeared  after  the  expulsion  from  Paradise, 
and  who  left  no  posterity,  —  with  whom  we  had  no 
connection  or  relations,  and  of  whom  we  had  no 
account  or  knowledge  beyond  what  is  contained  in 
the  first  two  chapters  of  Genesis.  The  nature  and 
faculties  of  such  beings,  though  of  no  importance  to 
us,  except  perhaps  as  a  curious  topic  of  speculation, 
would  doubtless  attract  our  interest ;  and  among 
other  inquiries,  we  should  probably  set  ourselves  to 
investigate  whether  they  possessed,  differently  from 
the  lower  creatures,  with  the  account  of  whose 
origin  theirs  is  connected,  a  moral  faculty  and  re- 
sponsibilities. 

In  such  an  inquiry,  following  the  sublime  account 
of  the  Creation  in  its  upward  steps  from  race  to  race, 
when  we  come  to  man,  what  do  we  find  to  indicate 
any  essential  diversity  in  these  respects  from  the 
creatures  that  preceded  him  ?  What  is  there  to  de- 


THE  CREATION  AND  THE  COMMAND.  81 

note  the  imposition  upon  him  of  any  new  relations 
to  the  Creator  and  his  laws  ?  The  partial  examina- 
tion which  we  have  already  given,  has  shown  us 
that  there  is  nothing ;  and  a  comparison  of  those- 
portions  of  the  narrative  which  relate  the  formation 
of  the  brutes,  and  those  which  recite  the  creation 
of  Man,  will  confirm  the  conclusion.  It  will  show 
what  we  have  already  noticed,  that  there  was  set 
no  essential  distinction  between  them,  except  in 
physical  and  intellectual  excellence,  and  in  differ- 
ence of  rank  and  dignity. 

Prona  que  cum  spectent  animalia  cetera  terrain, 
Os  homini  sublime  dedit,ccelumque  tueri 
Jussit,  et  erectos  ad  sidera  tollere  vultus. 

The  story  represents  both  the  birthday  and  the 
material  source  or  origin  of  man  and  the  brutes  to 
have  been  the  same  ;  both  being  formed  on  the  sixth 
day,  and  both  being  made  "  from  the  dust  of  the 
earth,"  (i.  e.,  from  the  same  original  elements  of 
which  the  earth  is  composed,)  a  truth  which  every 
new  discovery  of  Science  beautifully  confirms. 

"  And  the  Lord  God  formed  man  [of  the]  dust  of  the 
ground,  and  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life  ;  and 
man  became  a  h'ving  soul."  "  And  out  of  the  ground  the 
Lord  God  formed  every  beast  of  the  field,  and  every  fowl  of 
the  air,"  &c.,  &c.  (Genesis  ii.  7,  19.) 

Even  the  circumstance  which  alone  in  these  two 
cases  seems  to  suggest  a  possible  difference  of  con- 
stitution, the  breathing  into  man,  by  his  Maker,  of 


82  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

the  breath  of  life,  whereby  he  became  "  a  living 
soul,"  does  not  appear  to  form  a  real  distinction.  In 
chapter  i.  20,  the  Creator,  in  introducing  the  forma- 
tion of  the  lower  orders  of  animals,  the  tenants  of 
the  seas  and  air,  calls  them  "  the  moving  creature 
that  hath  life,"  —  the  expression  translated  "life" 
being  (NEPESH  HAVAH)  a  living  soul;  and  precisely 
the  same  term  which  is  applied  to  man  in  the  pas- 
sage we  are  considering,  the  only  change  being  to 
the  plural.  It  appears,  too,  that  the  creation  of  the 
brutes,  and  that  of  man,  though  distinct  acts  upon 
the  same  day,  were  so  far  blended  as  one  transac- 
tion, that,  although  a  special  blessing  had  been  pro- 
nounced on  the  fifth  day  upon  the  lower  creatures 
then  brought  into  being,  no  express  benediction  is 
given  on  the  sixth  to  the  brutes ;  but  with  that 
which  is  bestowed  upon  man  are  associated  general 
expressions  of  the  kindness  and  paternal  care  of 
the  Creator,  and  general  directions  of  life,  applicable 
to  all  the  races,  of  ever}7  grade,  alike. 

"  And  God  blessed  them,  [the  races  of  the  fifth  day,]  say- 
ing, Be  fruitful,  and  multiply,  and  fill  the  waters  in  the  seas, 
and  let  fowl  multiply  in  the  earth."  "  And  God  blessed  them, 
[Man,]  and  God  said  unto  them,  Be  fruitful,  and  multiply, 
and  replenish  the  earth,  and  subdue  it :  and  have  dominion 
over  the  fish  of  the  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over 
every  living  thing  that  moveth  upon  the  earth.  And  God 
said,  Behold,  I  have  given  you  every  herb  bearing  seed, 
which  is  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth,  and  every  tree,  in 
the  which  is  the  fruit  of  a  tree  yielding  seed  ;  to  you  it  shall 
be  for  meat  And  to  every  beast  of  the  earth,  and  to  every 
fowl  of  the  air,  and  to  everything  that  creepeth  upon  the 


THE  CREATION  AND  THE  COMMAND.  83 

earth,  wherein  there  is  life,  [a  living  soul,]  I  have  given  every 
green  herb  for  meat."     (Genesis  i.  22,  28-30.) 

This  address  of  God  to  man,  especially  the  first 
part  of  it,  merits  a  particular  notice.  In  it,  as  well 
as  in  the  remarks  with  which  man's  creation  was 
preceded,  (and  Avhich  we  have  already  partially 
considered,)  we  find  reference  to  a  wide  diversity 
between  man  and  the  other  creatures  in  powers  and 
privileges.  We  find  in  both,  a  proclamation  of  the 
design  with  which  he  was  created,  the  mission  he 
was  to  have,  and  the  sphere  he  was  to  fill.  We 
find,  as  we  should  expect,  a  code  of  instructions 
announced  to  him  at  the  outset  of  his  career,  as  the 
summary  of  his  obligations  and  his  rights,  —  of 
the  general  conditions  and  purposes  of  his  existence. 
It  includes  all  that  is  necessary  or  desirable  to  be 
enjoined  upon  a  merely  rational  being.  He  is  to 
multiply  his  race,  to  replenish  and  occupy  the  earth. 
He  is,  by  the  cultivation  and  exercise  of  his  varied 
intellectual  and  physical  powers,  by  civilization, 
learning,  art,  and  science,  to  "  subdue  "  the  elements 
and  the  forces  of  Nature,  with  all  the  races  of  its 
creatures,  turning  them  all  into  the  servants  of  his 
wants,  and  using  them  as  the  means  of  his  advance- 
ment. He  is,  in  short,  to  occupy  the  position  of 
lord  of  the  natural  world,  with  its  inhabitants,  and 
is,  by  the  development  of  all  his  powers,  to  fit  him- 
self worthily  to  adorn  that  station.  Is  it  not  re- 
markable that,  in  this  epitome  of  all  the  matters 
expected  of  him  by  his  Maker,  not  a  hint  is  given 


84  THE  RISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

of  that  important  fact,  which,  had  it  existed,  must 
have  constituted  the  fundamental  distinction  between 
him  and  all  other  creatures,  and  the  great  pervading 
idea,  in  all  directions  to  him  from  the  Author  of  his 
being  ?  Is  it  not  remarkable  that  while,  at  such  a 
time,  his  relations  to  the  world,  and  the  creatures 
about  him,  are  so  clearly  and  fully  set  forth,  not  a 
suggestion  is  dropped  of  any  such  relations  to  his 
God,  as,  had  he  been  a  moral  being,  must  have 
been  to  him,  unspeakably,  the  most  important  and 
interesting  of  all  considerations  ?  How  is  it  that 
we  find  not  a  word  from  which  we  can  infer  the 
imposition  upon  him  of  any  rule  of  moral  duty,  or 
even  the  existence  of  any  moral  capabilities  ? 

Theologians,  indeed,  seem  to  have  inferred,  and 
some  of  them  have  asserted  with  a  positiveness  that 
implies  the  necessity  of  such  a  supposition  to  the 
common  view  of  man's  original  moral  nature,  that, 
at  his  creation,  "  God  revealed  to  him,  in  direct  and 
definite  terms,  his  whole  duty,  and  disclosed  to  him 
the  law  by  which  his  life  was  to  be  governed." l 
Doubtless,  such  a  revelation  was  to  have  been  ex- 
pected had  man  been  created  a  moral  agent;  and 
although  the  fact  that  no  such  revelation  to  man 
at  this  period  has  been  revealed  is  not  a  conclusive 
proof  against  its  having  been  made,  it  yet  leaves 
such  a  declaration  as  the  above  unsupported  by 
authority.  The  sole  ground  (if  any)  upon  which 

1  Dwight's  Theology,  Vol.  I.  p.  396 ;  Dr.  Harris's  Man  Primeval,  ch. 
19,  sect.  3,  &c.,  &c. ;  Payne's  Lectures  on  Original  Sin,  p.  21. 


THE  CREATION  AND  THE  COMMAND.  85 

the  assertion  is  based,  is  found  in  the  fact  that  there 
was  imposed  upon  man  at  a  subsequent  period, 
(after  his  removal  into  Eden,)  a  specific  and  par- 
ticular injunction,  which  fact  is  thus  narrated :  — 

"  And  the  Lord  God  planted  a  garden  eastward  in  Eden, 
and  there  he  put  the  man  whom  he  had  formed."  "  And  the 
Lord  God  took  the  man  and  put  him  into  the  garden  to  dress 
it,  and  to  keep  it.  And  the  Lord  God  commanded  the  man, 
saying,  Of  every  tree  of  the  garden  thou  mayest  freely  eat : 
but  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  thou  shalt 
not  eat  of  it :  for  in  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt 
surely  die."  (Genesis  ii.  8,  15-17.) 

We  say  that  this  fact  offers  the  sole  ground  upon 
which  the  assertion  of  man's  original  moral  nature 
is  based,  because,  as  we  have  seen,  there  is  no  other 
declaration  or  circumstance  that  can  be  referred  to 
as  affording  the  slightest  evidence  of  his  then  pos- 
sessing such  an  endowment.  It  may  be,  indeed,  and 
is  generally  conjectured,  that  man  possessed  a  moral 
nature  upon  his  creation  ;  but  if  that  supposition  is 
questioned,  there  is  only  this  prohibition  to  cite  in 
support  of  it.  And,  accordingly,  it  is  appealed  to  for 
that  purpose  by  many  theologians ;  let  us  see  with 
what  reason. 

That  the  prohibition  did  not  in  itself  constitute 
any  such  revelation,  will  probably  be  admitted.  We 
need  not  argue  that  this  special  mandate  does  not 
comprise,  like  the  Ten  Commandments,  a  code  of 
moral  obligation,  "  disclosing  to  man  his  whole  duty, 
and  the  rules  by  which  his  life  was  to  be  governed." 
No  such  claim  is  set  up  in  any  quarter.  On  the 


86  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

other  hand,  it  is  insisted  that  this  mandate  was,  for 
the  time  being,  and  to  a  certain  extent,  a  substitute 
for  the  moral  law,  as  a  rule  of  probation  ;  and,  if  so, 
it  must  have  been  in  itself  a  something  different 
from  the  moral  law.  The  proposition  is  laid  down 
by  a  leading  writer,  "  that  by  a  divine  or  sovereign 
appointment  of  some  kind,  man's  thousand  liabili- 
ties were  reduced  to  one."  1  And  by  another,  that 
while  this  mandate  did  not  itself  relate  to  any  mat- 
ter of  general  moral  obligation,  yet  the  moral  law 
"  was  written  in  legible  characters  on  man's  heart. 
That  natural  sense  of  right  and  wrong,  which  exists 
even  now  in  every  human  being,  and  must  have 
existed  in  him  in  a  state  of  perfection,  combined  with 
subsequent  divine  revelations,  sufficiently  instructed 
him  concerning  the  will  of  God,"  2  &c.,  &c.  And 
the  doctrine  is,  that  this  special  command  respecting 
the  forbidden  fruit,  though  it  did  not  instruct  Adam 
in  his  moral  duties  or  relations,  yet  implied  that 
he  was  already,  either  by  nature  or  revelation,  ac- 
quainted with  them. 

So  far  as  regards  any  prior  moral  instructions  to 
Adam,  by  divine  revelation,  it  is  sufficient  to  say 
that  not  the  slightest  hint  or  intimation  of  any  such 
revelations  can  be  found  in  the  narrative,  and  to 
assume  them  is,  therefore,  to  say  the  least,  unwar- 
ranted. This  assumption,  however,  (as  in  the  pas- 
sage just  quoted,)  betrays  a  conscious  weakness  in 

1  Harris,  Man  Primeval. 

2  Payne's  Lectures  on  Original  Sin,  p.  21. 


THE  CREATION  AND  THE  COMMAND.  87 

respect  to  the  claim  in  favor  of  Adam's  moral  knowl- 
edge. It  evinces  a  doubt  whether  Adam,  after  all, 
had  so  much  moral  knowledge,  that  "  special  reve- 
lations "  must  not  necessarily  be  imagined  for  him 
besides ;  but  if  such  special  revelations  are  necessary 
to  be  supposed,  at  what  period  of  his  existence  was 
the  first  one  ?  and  why  may  we  not  believe  this  pro- 
hibition, with  the  consequences  resulting  from  its 
violation,  to  have  themselves  conveyed  the  first? 
The  writer,  indeed,  speaks  of  Adam's  state  of  per- 
fection as  proving  his  moral  knowledge.  But  by 
this  supposed  "  state  of  perfection,"  he  must  mean, 
if  anything,  Adam's  moral  perfection,  —  thus  assum- 
ing his  conclusion  to  prove  his  premises.  For  if  he 
means  his  physical  and  intellectual  perfection,  we 
have  already  shown  that  a  moral  nature  is  not 
necessarily  implied  by  these.  But  apart  from  any 
admissions  or  inconsistencies  of  those  who  make  the 
claims  in  question,  how,  we  ask,  can  it  be  maintained 
that  a  special  and  definite  mandate  upon  a  particu- 
lar point,  not  relating  to  moral  subjects,  necessarily 
implies  a  moral  knowledge  and  responsibility  in  the 
being  to  whom  it  is  addressed  ?  Can  no  command 
be  given  except  to  a  moral  being  ?  Do  we  not  every 
day  see  commands,  prohibitions,  laws,  issued  to  in- 
fants, and  to  animals  incapable  of  moral  reasoning? 
In  the  Scriptures  themselves,  we  read  that  God 
"  commanded  "  the  fish  which  swallowed  and  re- 
leased the  prophet  Jonah  ;  Joshua  "  commanded  " 
the  sun  and  moon  to  stand  still ;  Christ  "  com- 


88  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

manded  "  the  winds  and  the  seas.  Adam  himself 
was  to  "  have  dominion,"  that  is,  to  exercise  com- 
mand as  his  descendants  do,  over  the  inferior  creat- 
ures, and  to  hold  them  responsible  for  obedience. 
In  all  these  cases,  no  prior  moral  knowledge  in  the 
objects  "commanded"  is  implied,  and  why,  there- 
fore, does  a  specific  mandate,  to  man  in  his  original 
condition,  necessarily  imply  that  that  condition  was 
one  of  moral  knowledge  and  responsibility  ? 

But  if  the  mere  fact  of  a  command  being  issued 
does  not  imply  this  moral  knowledge,  is  there  any- 
thing in  the  form  or  circumstances  of  the  prohibi- 
tion itself  which  raises  such  implication  ?  We  have 
alluded  to  the  fact  that  it  was  single,  precise,  and 
definite,  in  its  terms.  It  forbade  but  one  simple 
act.  It  was  based  upon  the  circumstances  of  a  par- 
ticular locality,  and  could  have  no  application  as  a 
rule  of  conduct  in  any  other  place.  The  act  for- 
bidden, too,  had  intrinsically  no  moral  character. 
The  injunction  restrained  no  particular  appetite, 
(like  a  law  of  temperance,)  for  it  was  coupled  with 
the  permission  "  to  freely  eat "  of  the  fruit  of  any 
and  every  other  tree  in  the  garden.  It  might  as 
well  have  been,  as  is  generally  admitted,  "  the  pro- 
hibition to  any  other  act,  —  as  the  bathing  in  a  par- 
ticular river,  for  instance," l  or  anything  else  equally 
indifferent.  It  was,  therefore,  no  part  of  a  moral 
law.  It  did  not  recall  to  man's  attention  any  of 
his  general  moral  duties,  and  consequently,  unless 

1  Harris,  Man  Primeval,  &c. 


THE  CREATION  AND  THE  COMMAND.  89 

(which  we  have  just  disproved)  the  mere  issuing 
of  any  command  to  man  in  itself  implied  his  moral 
agency,  there  is  nothing  in  it  from  which  the  infer- 
ence of  such  agency  can  be  drawn.  Indeed,  as  we 
shall  probably  urge  hereafter,  it  rather  precludes 
than  favors  such  a  supposition ;  for  it  would  be 
strange,  indeed,  that  such  a  mandate  should  have 
been  imposed  upon  a  moral  agent,  as  the  sole  test 
of  his  virtue,  whether  in  an  individual  or  a  repre- 
sentative capacity. 

It  has  been  insisted,  indeed,  by  some  writers 
that,  in  Adam's  peculiar  circumstances,  no  other 
sort  of  command  than  such  as  we  have  described, 
namely,  —  one  without  relation  to  moral  duty,  could 
have  been  imposed  as  a  test  of  obedience.  It  is  said 
that,  situated  as  he  was,  it  was  almost  impossible  for 
him  to  violate  any  of  the  Ten  Commandments  had 
they  been  revealed  to  him.  That  he  could  hardly 
have  followed  false  gods,  or  worshipped  idols,  or 
profaned  God's  name,  or  broken  the  Sabbath,  or 
dishonored  father  and  mother,  or  committed  murder, 
adultery,  or  theft,  or  borne  false  witness,  or  coveted 
another's  goods,  had  such  sins  been  suggested  to 
him ;  and  that  thus,  as  there  was  no  moral  rule 
which  could  be  made  the  test,  a  mandate  indifferent 
in  its  character  was  adopted  of  necessity.  But  this 
theory  will  not  bear  examination.  For  if  Adam's  cir- 
cumstances, at  the  outset  of  his  existence,  were  such 
(and  we  have  ourselves  taken  pains  to  show  that 
they  were)  that  there  was  little  likelihood  of  his 


90  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

being  tempted  to  sin,  yet  these  circumstances  were 
but  temporary.  Many  of  them,  indeed,  necessarily 
continued  only  up  to  the  time  of  Eve's  creation,  and 
were  removed  upon  her  making  a  society  for  him 
and  with  him.  Others  still  subsisted  for  a  longer 
period ;  but  after  Eve's  creation,  certainly,  (upon  the 
ordinary  view  of  their  being  both  moral  beings,) 
there  were  moral  duties  reciprocally  due  between 
them,  which  both  would  be  at  times  tempted  to  vio- 
late. But  we  do  not  need  to  rely  upon  this  answer. 
Even  before  Eve's  creation,  had  Adam  (as  a  moral 
being)  no  duties  to  his  Maker,  to  himself,  or  to  the 
lower  creatures  which  he  could  neglect  or  violate  ? 
Could  he  not  be  guilty  of  coldness,  ingratitude,  re- 
sentment toward  God  ?  Would  he  have  been  un- 
able to  commit  the  sin  of  profanity,  or  Sabbath- 
breaking  ?  Was  he  incapable  of  neglecting  his  per- 
sonal duties  of  self-improvement,  temperance,  and 
industry  ?  Could  he  not  be  guilty  of  cruelty  to  the 
lower  animals  ?  Had  he  been  a  moral  being,  any 
of  these  possibilities  would  have  suggested  moral 
tests  of  his  character,  had  such  been  wanted ;  and  if 
(as  is  no  doubt  true)  his  earlier  circumstances  must 
have  greatly  diminished  the  temptations  to  violate 
such  duties,  still  in  time,  even  as  a  solitary  being, 
he  would  have  been  subject  to  their  influence.  We 
do  not  find  that  the  wanderer  on  a  desert  island  is 
incapable  of  committing  sin,  or  becomes  invulnerable 
to  every  temptation.  Indeed,  in  Adam's  case  there 
was  one  of  the  Ten  Commandments  specially  suitable 


THE  CREATION  AND  THE  COMMAND.  91 

as  a  moral  test,  to  wit,  the  law  against  "  doing  any 
manner  of  work  on  the  Sabbath  day,"  —  a  law,  the 
reason  for  which  was  then  in  full  force,  the  six  days' 
work  of  creation  having  then  been  just  completed, 
on  account  of  which  "  the  Lord  blessed  the  seventh 
day,  and  sanctified  it."  The  day,  then,  at  least  in 
God's  mind,  was  sacred  then;  and  how  is  it  that 
Adam  was  not  enjoined  to  "  keep  it  holy  ?  "  It  will 
not  answer  to  say  that  he  might  have  been  so  en- 
joined in  fact.  Apart  from  the  circumstance  that 
there  is  no  hint  of  such  an  injunction  upon  him, 
there  is  the  remarkable  absence  of  all  evidence  that 
the  Sabbath  day  was  ever  observed  by  the  patriarchs 
or  the  Jews  down  to  the  time  of  Moses,  —  an  im- 
portant truth  in  its  bearing  upon  other  parts  of  our 
view,  as  we  shall  show  hereafter.  Had  Adam  ever 
received  the  law  of  the  Sabbath,  it  is  impossible 
that  his  descendants  for  so  long  a  period  should  have 
lost  it. 

We  think,  then,  that  the  doctrine  of  man's  orig- 
inal moral  nature  must  be  admitted  to  be  destitute 
of  all  Scriptural  authority.  As  before  remarked,  it 
rests  upon  conjecture  alone,  not  only  without  sup- 
port, but,  as  we  hope  to  prove  satisfactorily,  against 
the  teachings  of  revelation.  In  this  chapter,  we 
have  confined  ourselves  to  considering  the  evidence 
against  it,  which  arises  by  implication  from  the  nar- 
rative. In  subsequent  pages  we  shall  offer  proof 
against  it,  not  only  from  the  facts  of  the  narrative, 
but  from  the  doctrinal  inconsistencies  and  confusions 


92  THE   RISE   AND  THE  FALL. 

into  which  it  conducts  its  advocates.  We  think  it 
will  appear  that  simplicity,  clearness,  and  truth  can 
be  attained  only  by  believing  that  this  special  pro- 
hibition (particularly  as  we  find  no  hint  of  any 
other)  was  in  fact  the  only  law  of  conduct  to  which 
man  was,  before  the  transgression,  held  subject  or 
accountable. 


PURPORT  OF  THE  COMMAND.  93 


CHAPTER  III. 

DIRECT  EVIDENCE  TO  THE  SAME  EFFECT  DRAWN  FROM 
THE  SAME  NARRATIVE.     THE  COMMAND. 

WE  have  considered  in  the  last  chapter  the  indi- 
rect proofs  which  the  sacred  history  furnishes  that 
Man,  in  his  original  nature,  was  devoid  of  moral 
perceptions,  but  it  is  not  wanting  in  more  positive 
evidences. 

And  first,  we  shall  notice  a  slight  and  apparently 
trivial  fact  which  is  stated,  (chap.  ii.  25,)  and  which 
sheds  a  light  upon  the  subject  not  to  be  disregarded. 
It  reads  as  follows :  — 

"  And  they  were  both  naked,  the  man  and  his  wife,  and 
they  were  not  ashamed ;  "  [or,  as  the  Chaldaic  version  gives  it, 
—  "  They  knew  not  what  shame  was."  !] 

It  is  somewhat  singular  that  the  narrator  should 
have  taken  pains  to  note  this  state  of  moral  insensi- 
bility in  our  first  parents  at  this  period,  unless  as  a 
hint  upon  the  very  subject  of  our  inquiry.  It  seems 
to  us  that  it  clearly  does  furnish  a  suggestion  re- 
garding it,  for  it  reveals  a  then  absence  from  man's 
constitution  of  one  of  the  earliest  and  most  sensitive 
instincts  of  his  moral  nature.  It  is  the  brutes  and 

1  Comprehensive  Commentary :  Genesis. 


94  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

infants,  and  those  savages  who  seem  totally  devoid 
of  moral  ideas  only,  that  are  unconscious  of  those 
instinctive  promptings.  In  both  children  and  sav- 
ages, too,  they  invariably  exhibit  themselves  upon 
the  first  awakening  movements  of  the  moral  faculty  ; 
and  in  conformity  with  this  analogy,  we  shall  notice 
hereafter  as  a  remarkable  confirmation  of  our  view, 
that  the  first  emotion  experienced  by  Adam  and  Eve 
after  their  disobedience,  impelled  them  to  their  first 
succeeding  act,  —  the  adoption  of  a  covering.  At 
present,  we  only  suggest  that,  with  the  theory  of 
man's  perfect  and  delicate  moral  sensibilities,  involv- 
ing correct  conceptions  of  purity  and  impurity,  this 
total  indifference  to,  or  ignorance  of,  the  sentiment 
of  modesty  seems  entirely  inconsistent ;  and  by  it 
his  subsequent  instantaneous  change  in  this  respect, 
as  an  effect  of  his  disobedience,  is  rendered  equally 
unaccountable. 

A  more  striking  proof,  however,  and  one  that  has 
been  strangely  overlooked  by  commentators,  is  af- 
forded by  the  name  of  that  tree  which  is  the  cen- 
tral feature  in  the  narrative,  and  whose  effects  upon 
the  partakers  constitute  its  whole  significance.  The 
neglect  which  we  have  referred  to  in  theological 
writers  is,  however,  explainable.  Upon  the  common 
doctrine  of  man's  original  moral  nature,  the  com- 

O 

mand  and  disobedience  which  decided  his  destiny, 
needed  not  to  have  relation  to  any  particular  sub- 
ject, or  to  have  in  themselves  any  peculiar  signifi- 
cance. The  whole  story,  according  to  it,  is  this. 


THE  COMMAND.  95 

Man  was  at  first  holy,  or  at  least  in  his  moral  char- 
acter, and  as  a  moral  agent,  intelligently,  consciously, 
and  voluntarily  perfect.  In  this  state  a  specific  test 
was  made  by  his  Maker  of  his  firmness  in  obedience, 
by  a  special  law  of  conduct.  This  law,  upon  the 
first  temptation,  man  wilfully  disobeyed,  and  by  that 
disobedience  became  then  and  thenceforth,  himself 
and  his  race,  sinful  and  corrupted.  In  such  a  theory, 
it  would  be  indifferent  what  were  the  precise  nature 
of  the  mandate  thus  applied  as  a  test,  and  which 
man  wilfully  disobeyed.  It  might  have  been  one 
thing  as  well  as  another,  or  as  Dr.  Harris  says  in 
the  passage  we  have  already  quoted  (ch.  19,  sec. 
iii.  12)  :  "  Respecting  the  probable  reasons  for  the 
particular  act  prohibited,  nothing  need  be  said. 
That  something  else  might  have  been  forbidden,  — 
the  use  of  a  particular  stream,  or  the  approach  to  a 
particular  spot,  and  that  the  same  truths  might  have 
been  taught  by  such  prohibition,  is  quite  possible." 
Hence  it  is  that  the  real  character  and  purport  of 
the  command  as  indicated  by  the  appellation  of  the 
tree  to  which  it  related,  has  been  left  in  obscurity. 
But,  in  the  light  of  the  considerations  we  have  re- 
viewed, it  becomes  invested  with  extraordinary 
meaning,  and  fraught  with  luminous  suggestion. 

The  tree  whose  fruit  was  forbidden  to  Adam 
was  not  (as  the  common  view  of  it  would  seem  to 
imply)  "the  tree  of  evil,"  nor  yet  was  it  "the 
tree  of  good  and  evil,"  but  "  the  tree  of  the 
KNOWLEDGE  of  good  and  evil."  In  other  words, 


96  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

it  was,  as  we  shall  see  upon  a  critical  examination 
of  the  phrase,  "  THE  TREE  or  THE  APPREHENSION 
OF  RIGHT  AND  WRONG."  The  expression  is  ren- 
dered in  the  Chaldaic  version  before  referred  to, 
(Targum  of  Onkelos,)  "the  tree  of  which  they 
who  eat  are  wise  in  discerning  (or  knowing)  the 
difference  between  good  and  evil " 1  (i.  e.,  right 
and  wrong).  This,  then,  was  the  faculty  which 
was  alone  wanting  in  man  to  render  him  "as 
gods  "  (ELOHIM,  God)  ;  the  faculty  after  which  the 
serpent  tempted  him  to  aspire,  in  order  that  he 
might  thus  "  become  like  God,  knowing  good  and 
evil " ;  and  which,  when  acquired  by  man,  was 
thus  declared  by  the  Almighty  himself  to  increase 
the  resemblance  between  them,  —  "  Behold,  the 
man  has  become  as  one  of  us,  to  know  good  and 
evil."  Let  us  examine,  then,  somewhat  carefully 
the  import  of  the  phrase  under  consideration ;  and 
first,  of  the  word  "  knowledge." 

This  word  (Hebrew,  YADAH  ;  Septuagint,  TOV 
yivwo-xetv;  Latin,  cognoscendi,  scientice^)  has  been 
taken  by  some  commentators  in  the  sense  of  "  ex- 
perience," 2  (a  meaning,  however,  hardly  sanc- 
tioned by  the  Hebrew,)  but  a  different  sense  is 
plainly  understood  by  the  writer  of  the  Targum  of 
Onkelos,  whose  version  we  have  cited,  and  who  is 
regarded  as  the  highest  authority.  Whether  or  not 

1  Bush's  Notes  on  Genesis,  pp.  11,  58.  "Walton's  Polyglott  Bible  trans- 
lates the  Chaldaic  into  "Arbor  cognoscendi  boni  et  matt,"  and  the  origi- 
nal into  "Arbor  scientice  boni  et  mali." 

a  Comprehensive  Commentary ;  Bush  on  Genesis,  p.  56. 


THE  COMMAND.  97 

experimental  acquaintance  can  be  implied,  at  least, 
simple  intelligence,  or  cognition,  is  an  essential  part 
of  the  idea  it  conveys.  Accordingly,  (to  quote 
from  Professor  Bush,)1  "  the  learned  Vitringa,  who 
seldom  advances  an  opinion  that  is  not  entitled  to 
great  respect,  argues,  that  to  know  good  and  evil  in 
the  language  of  the  Scriptures,  is  to  understand 
the  nature  of  good  and  evil,  of  right  and  wrong, 
not  to  experience  it."  "  For,  (he  argues  in  sub- 
stance,) if  our  first  parents  gained  their  first  expe- 
rience of  good  and  evil  by  the  fall,  this  implies  that 
they  were  before  unacquainted  with  good,  and  not 
only  so,  but  that  they  experienced  good  from  that 
event,  whereas  they  in  fact  derived  only  evil ; " 
and  these  objections,  Professor  Bush,  without  fully 
assenting  to,  admits  himself  unable  to  answer.  It 
may  be  added  that  the  "  knowledge "  referred  to 
is  shown  not  to  be  experience,  by  the  fact  that  when 
actually  obtained,  by  eating  of  the  forbidden  fruit, 
its  effect  was  both  immediate  and  complete,  and  is 
also  described  in  the  narrative  by  the  expression, 
"  their  eyes  were  opened,"  plainly  denoting  new 
and  instantaneous  perceptions  of  some  sort ;  thus  :  — 

"  She  took  of  the  fruit  thereof  and  did  eat,  and  gave  also  to 
her  husband  with  her,  and  he  did  eat.  And  the  eyes  of  them 
both  were  opened,  and  they  knew  that  they  were  naked." 
(Chap.  iii.  6,  7.) 

Here  the  verb  "  knew  "  in  the  original,  is  radi- 
cally the  same  as  "  knowledge  "  in  the  phrase  under 

1  Bush  on  Genesis,  p.  56. 
7 


98  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

consideration,  —  "  knowledge  of  good  and  evil."  It 
is  obvious  that  it  does  not  mean  that  they  expe- 
rienced that  they  were  naked,  for  this  was  a  con- 
dition long  familiar  to  their  consciousness.  It  evi- 
dently implies  that  they  intellectually  recognized,  or 
perceived,  certain  considerations  or  ideas  in  connec- 
tion with  the  fact  of  their  nudity,  which  they  had 
never  before  recognized.  This  interpretation  is  con- 
firmed by  finding  the  same  word  used  (verse  4, 
chap,  iii.),  where  the  tempter  says,  "for  God  doth 
know  that  ye  shall  be  as  gods  knowing  good  and 
evil."  Again ;  verse  6  expressly  describes  the  ef- 
fect of  the  tree  as  to  make  one  wise,  (L'HASKIL,  i.  e., 
to  cause  to  understand.')  And  in  verse  22,  (already 
quoted,)  God  says,  "  Behold  the  man  has  become  as 
one  of  us,  to  know  good  and  evil ; "  in  which  ex- 
pression evidently  the  Divine  knowledge  to  which 
man  is  said  to  have  already  attained,  cannot  be  un- 
derstood to  be  experience,  —  whether  the  "  good  and 
evil "  thus  "  known  "  be  supposed  to  be  happiness 
and  misery,  or  right  and  wrong.  The  knowledge 
which  God  has  of  "  evil,"  in  whatever  form,  must 
be  an  intellectual  comprehension,  and  not  an  experi- 
mental acquaintance. 

Upon  this  point,  in  further  support  of  our  jnter- 
pretation,  we  might  cite  many  and  able  authorities. 
As  a  recent  work,1  however,  has  given  a  short 
exposition  of  the  true  meaning  of  the  word  here 
rendered  "  to  know,"  we  will  insert  it  here.  The 
author  says :  — 

1  Taveh  Christ,  p.  78. 


THE  COMMAND.  99 

"In  respect  to  the  use  of  the  name  YAVEH,  or  'Jehovah,' 
by  the  Patriarchs,  we  find  it  upon  every  page  of  their  history ; 
and  yet  on  turning  to  Exod.  vi.  3,  it  is  there  stated  by  God 
himself  that  by  his  name  YAVEH,  He  was  not  known  to 
them.  This  apparent  inconsistency  has  been  a  stumbling- 
block  to  many,  and  has  even  been  seized  upon  by  some  who 
lay  claim  to  superior  scholarship,  as  an  objection  to  the 
credibility  of  these  records.  .  .  .  The  objection  disap- 
pears at  once  upon  reference  to  the  original.  The  verb 
[to  know]  there  used,  means  '  to  comprehend,'  '  to  under- 
stand,' and  is  very  inaccurately  and  inadequately  rendered 
by  '  to  know.'  Literally  it  reads,  'And  by  my  name  YAVEH 
was  I  not  "  comprehended,"  or  "  understood  "  by  them.'  It 
properly  conveys  the  meaning  'to  see  with  the  mind,'  'to 
understand  by  means  of  explanatory  circumstances.'  As  in 
the  return  of  the  dove  to  the  Ark  with  an  olive-leaf,  then 
Noah  '  knew '  that  the  waters  were  abated.  And  in  the 
sacrifice  of  Manoah,  when  the  Angel  of  the  Lord  ascended 
in  the  flame  of  the  altar,  and  returned  not,  '  then  Manoah 
"  knew "  he  was  an  Angel  of  the  Lord.'  An  instance  by 
which  the  sense  of  this  word  may  be  tested,  occurs  in  Isaiah 
vi.  9  :  '  Seeing  they  shall  see,  and  shall  not  perceive' —  that  is, 
'  understand,'  '  comprehend.'  The  word  here  correctly  ren- 
dered '  perceive,'  is  precisely  the  one  which,  in  the  case  under 
consideration,  our  translators  have  given  as  '  know.' " 

We  think,  therefore,  that  we  may  safely  con- 
clude that  the  sense  of  the  word  "  knowledge,"  in 
the  title  of  the  tree  in  question,  is  more  precisely 
given  by  the  term  "  apprehension,"  and  we  accord- 
ingly proceed  to  examine  the  force  of  the  remaining 
terms,  "  good  and  evil." 

These  words  in  our  version  are  evidently  indef- 
inite in  their  signification.  They  have  been  un- 
derstood by  some  commentators  in  the  sense  of 


100  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

"  happiness  and  misery  ;  "  and  by  others,  still  more 
indefinitely,  as  "all  things,"  "all  things  worth 
knowing."  1  To  the  first  of  these  interpretations  it 
may  be  replied  that  the  serpent  would  hardly  have 
urged  upon  our  first  parents  as  a  temptation  to  dis- 
obey God's  command,  that  they  should  thereby 
come  to  "  apprehend "  (still  less  "  experience ") 
happiness  and  misery  ;  especially  since  (they  being 
already  in  the  enjoyment  of  happiness)  in  such  an 
offer  misery  would  be  the  only  new  knowledge 
promised  them.  To  the  second,  we  may  say  that 
if  man's  having  been  formed  in  the  image  of  God 
involved  his  possession  of  high  intellectual  powers, 
or  even  of  those  equal  to  what  he  at  present  pos- 
sesses, then  he  was  already  equally  or  more  capable 
of  "  knowing  all  things,"  than  he  has  been  since 

o  o    * 

partaking  of  the  forbidden  fruit,  and  the  designation 
of  the  tree  was  therefore  a  misnomer.  And  to  both 
renderings,  the  remark  of  God  before  quoted  (chap, 
iii.  22),  "  Behold  the  man  is  become  as  one  of  us,  to 
know  good  and  evil,"  presents  a  conclusive  objec- 
tion ;  for  it  shows :  1st,  that  the  full  effect  of  the 
tree,  in  the  "  knowledge  "  it  was  to  impart,  had 
been  attained  immediately  upon  the  partaking  of 
its  fruit;  and  2d,  that  this  knowledge,  so  already 
attained,  was  neither  that  of  "  happiness  and  mis- 
ery," nor  of  "  all  things  worth  knowing." 

In   fact,  if  we  have   established  that   the  word 
"  knowledge  "  is  equivalent  to  "  intellectual  appre- 

1  Bush's  Notes  on  Genesis,  p.  56 ;  Comprehensive  Commentary. 


THE  COMMAND.  101 

hension,"  then  it  will  follow  almost  of  course  that 
"  good  and  evil "  in  the  same  passage,  must  mean 
"  right  and  wrong,"  since  only  a  moral  distinction 
of  that  kind  could  properly  be  a  subject  of  intellect- 
ual apprehension ;  unless  indeed  it  be  claimed  that 
the  words  are  properly  interpreted  by  the  phrase, 
"  the  advisable,  and  unadvisable,"  a  signification 
which  will  hardly  be  insisted  on,  as  it  impliedly 
denies  to  our  first  parents  the  original  gift  of  reason. 

An  examination  of  the  original  will  confirm  our 
view  that  these  words  are  to  be  understood  in  this 
passage  in  their  moral  signification. 

The  Hebrew  words  employed  (TOY,  good,  and 
RA,  evil),  particularly  the  former,  are  generic,  and 
are  properly  rendered  in  our  translation  by  the  cor- 
responding generic  and  indefinite  words,  "  good  " 
and  "  evil."  The  only  question  is,  are  they  here 
to  be  understood  in  the  sense  of  natural  or  moral 
qualities.  The  word  TOV  (rendered  in  the  Septua- 
gint,  KaAov,  and  in  the  English  translation,  "  good  ") 
also  appears  in  the  following  connections :  1st,  in 
chap.  i.  31,  where  God,  looking  upon  his  work  of 
Creation,  saw  that  it  was  "  good " ;  and  2d,  in 
chap.  iv.  7,  where  God,  rebuking  Cain  for  his  sin- 
ful anger,  says,  "  If  thou  doest  well  (Hebrew  verb 
TATEV,  of  which  TOV  is  root),  shall  it  not  be  ac- 
cepted? "  From  the  latter  of  these  examples  it  is 
manifest  that  this  word  TOV  admits  of  a  moral  sense 
in  the  passage  we  are  considering.  Whatever  un- 
certainty regarding  it  may  still  exist,  will  be  re- 


102  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

moved  by  examining  the  sense  of  its  correlative, 
BA  (evil),  in  the  same  sentence,  since  it  is  plain 
that  the  same  rule  of  interpretation  must  apply  to 
both. 

^his  word  RA  (rendered  in  the  Septuagint  TO 
irovypov,  wickedness)  is  the  same  that  is  employed 
in  chap.  vi.  5 :  uAnd  God  saw  that  the  wickedness 
(Hebrew,  RA,  Septuagint,  TO  TTOJ^/JOV)  of  man  was 
great  in  the  earth,  and  that  every  imagination  of 
the  thought  of  his  heart  was  only  evil  (RA)  con- 
tinually" (literally,  "evil,  evil,  everyday").  It 
may  be  observed  that  in  these  different  passages 
of  Genesis,  the  same  sense  is  more  certainly  estab- 
lished for  the  same  word,  thus  recurring  in  the 
original,  by  the  contemporaneous  origin  of  the  dif- 
ferent passages  in  which  it  occurs ;  an  argument 
which  the  Hebrew  scholar  will  best  appreciate.  It 
is  for  this  reason  that  we  do  not  make  a  more 
extended  comparison  of  passages  from  various  por- 
tions of  Scripture,  as  we  might  do,  tending  to 
establish  the  same  point.  Thus,  the  same  Hebrew 
words  are  used  in  Isaiah  vii.  16 :  "  Before  the 
child  shall  know  how  to  refuse  the  evil  and  choose 
the  good"  etc.,  in  which  phrase  all  commentators 
agree  that  they  have  a  moral  signification.1 

So  satisfactory,  indeed,  is  the  evidence  with  regard 
to  the  real  force  of  these  terms  for  "  good  and 
evil,"  that  not  only  "  the  learned  Vitringa,"  as 
we  have  seen,  actually  renders  them  by  "  right 

1  See  Barnes  on  Isaiah ;  Rosenmuller,  etc. 


THE  COMMAND.  108 

and  wrong,"  but  Gesenius1  expressly  defines  RA 
in  this  place  as  "  wickedness "  (TO  xaKov).  We 
shall  doubtless  be  safe  in  accepting  these  authori- 
ties, at  least  in  connection  with  the  considerations 
we  have  reviewed,  as  conclusive  upon  the  question 
of  their  moral  import.2 

1  Thesaurus,  Robinson's  Translation,  ed.  1850. 

2  See  also  Herder's  Spirit  of  Hebrew  Poetry,  Marsh's  Translation, 
Vol.  I.  p.  132 ;  Bunsen's  Biebel  Werke  ;  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible, 
1860,  Article  ADAM. 


104  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

EFFECT  OF  THE  FOREGOING,   AND  OBJECTIONS  TO  IT 
CONSIDERED. 

WE  think  it  will  be  generally  admitted  that 
sufficient  evidence  has  been  adduced  to  prove  our 
position,  that  by  the  phrase,  "  the  tree  of  the  knowl- 
edge of  good  and  evil,"  is  meant  "  the  tree  of  the 
apprehension  of  right  and  wrong."  Unless,  there- 
fore, this  be  a  mere  chance  appellation,  totally  des- 
titute of  point  or  meaning,  we  must  suppose  it  to 
imply  that  the  object  it  designates  was  created  in 
order  to  be  the  instrument  of  occasioning  the  im- 
partation  to  man  (supernaturally  doubtless)  of  fac- 
ulties and  perceptions  before  unknown,  and  pertain- 
ing to  the  cognizance  of  moral  distinctions.  If  we 
are  to  apply  to  it  the  plainest  rules  of  interpretation, 
itself  reveals  the  truth  respecting  man's  nature  both 
before  and  after  he  partook  of  the  forbidden  fruit, 
and  is  the  key  by  which  we  are  to  unlock  the  whole 
narrative  before  us. 

As  we  use  this  key  in  our  progress,  we  shall  see 
how  readily  it  causes  to  yield  and  open  the  difficul- 
ties with  which  the  common  view  has  enclosed  this 
simple  story,  with  the  effect  to  harass  every  think- 
ing mind.  Understanding  man  before  his  disobe- 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  10,5 

dience  as  a  being  ignorant  of  the  nature  of  right 
and  wrong,  the  explanation  of  his  otherwise  unac- 
countable conduct  becomes  easy  ;  the  admitted  ef- 
fects of  that  disobedience  on  himself  and  posterity 
intelligible  ;  and  God's  course  toward  all,  of  obvious 
benevolence  and  justice.  Before  entering,  how- 
ever, upon  the  details  of  the  narrative  relating  to 
the  act  of  disobedience  and  its  consequences,  it  will 
be  proper  to  notice  some  objections  that  may  be 
offered  at  the  outset,  to  the  views  we  have  urged, 
regarding  the  true  purport  of  the  narrative. 

The  first  objection  that  naturally  occurs,  grows 
out  of  the  obvious  truth,  that  the  attaining  of  a 
moral  faculty  by  man  would  be  a  substantial  benefit 
to  him,  and  an  elevation  of  his  nature.  Hence,  it 
will  be  said,  it  could  hardly  be  supposed  that  God 
would  have  imposed  an  injunction  upon  man  per- 
emptorily forbidding  such  attainment ;  and  espe- 
cially, that  he  would  have  coupled  such  injunction 
with  a  threatened  penalty  for  disobedience.  We 
may  also  again  and  more  fully  allude  to  the  inquiiy 
already  suggested :  "  Why,  if  man  had  no  moral 
sense,  —  no  knowledge  of  right  and  wrong,  —  was 
a  law  imposed  upon  him,  with  a  punishment  for  its 
violation  ?  Is  not  this  fact  in  itself  inconsistent  with 
the  supposition  ?  " 

To  the  latter  objection  we  reply,  in  the  first  place, 
and  to  the  same  effect  as  heretofore :  it  does  not 
follow  that  because  man  had  no  moral  sense,  he 
could  not  clearly  comprehend  the  force  of  the  im- 


106  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

perative.  An  infant,  or  an  animal,  understands  a 
command,  and  recognizes  its  connection  with  the 
rod  held  up  to  enforce  it ;  but  we  do  not  thence 
infer  in  them  any  moral  ideas  or  reasoning.  Even, 
therefore,  had  the  prohibition  in  question  been  one 
which  might  be  classed  among  those  of  moral  duty, 
there  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing  that  man  could 
have  felt  its  binding  force  without  comprehending 
the  moral  reasons  that  sustained  it.  The  fact  that 
it  was  not  of  that  character,  but  had  relation  to  a 
matter  involving  no  moral  principle  or  duty  what- 
ever, is  an  additional  and  a  strong  circumstance  in 
meeting  the  objection  ;  and  the  fact  of  the  com- 
mand, so  far  from  being  inconsistent  with  our  view, 
seems  inconsistent  with  any  other ;  for,  as  before 
suggested,  it  seems  hardly  supposable  that  such  a 
command  would  have  been  selected  as  the  test  of 
fidelity  in  a  moral  being. 

But  farther.  The  very  form  of  the  mandate 
seems  to  imply  that  it  was  addressed  to  the  under- 
standing, —  the  judgment,  —  and  not  to  a  moral 
faculty.  There  are  strong  reasons  for  regarding  the 
last  clause  of  it  as  a  prediction,  rather  than  a  threat ; 
and  so  interpreting  the  whole  as  a  warning,  in  the 
form  of  a  command.  The  passage  reads  literally, 
"  Of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil, 
eat  not  of  it,  because  (Hebrew,  CHE)  in  the  day 
thou  eatest  of  it,  dying  thou  shalt  die."  The  He- 
brew word  here  more  literally  rendered  "  be- 
cause," imports  simple  result,  without  implying 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  107 

any  new  causation  to  produce  it.  Accordingly,  the 
Cbaldee  version  reads  (as  translated  in  "  Walton's 
Polyglott  Bible "),  "  quonid  (since)  in  die  qud 
comederis  ex  ea^  morte  morieris"  Nor  is  there 
any  such  sternness  in  the  announcement  of  conse- 
quent death,  as  our  English  translation  would  seem 
to  indicate.  It  is  precisely  the  same  form  of  ex- 
pression which  occurs  in  verse  16  :  "  Of  every  tree 
in  the  garden,  eating  thou  shalt  eat ; "  and  there 
interpreted  in  our  version  as  a  gracious  permission, 
"  thou  mayest  freely  eat."  It  would  appear,  there- 
fore, that  in  this  injunction  God  were  addressing 
man's  prudence ;  as  if,  for  want  of  a  moral  sense  to 
which  to  appeal,  He  relied  upon  self-interest  to 
deter  him  from  disobedience,  through  the  fear  of 
certain  consequences  forewarned  to  ensue.  These 
forewarned  consequences  need  not  necessarily  have 
been  the  natural  consequences  of  the  forbidden 
fruit ;  they  might  be  such  consequences,  not  natu- 
ral or  necessary,  which  God  yet  saw  best  should 
attend  the  change  in  man's  nature,  occurring  at 
the  transgression.  In  either  case  they  would  be 
proper  considerations  to  enter  into  an  appeal  to 
man's  prudence,  rather  than  his  conscience ;  just 
as  a  parent  might  command  his  infant  child  —  too 
young  to  comprehend  moral  appeals  —  not  to  play 
with  fire,  lest  it  should  be  burned  (a  natural  conse- 
quence), or  not  to  do  so,  lest  it  should  be  deprived 
of  some  plaything  or  other  privilege  (a  special  and 
punitive  consequence). 


108  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

The  real  truth  with  regard  to  mortality  seems  to 
have  been  that  it  was,  even  in  man's  original  state, 
his  natural  condition ;  as  it  was  and  ever  has  been 
that  of  all  other  creatures,  whether  anterior  to  or 
contemporary  with  the  human  race.  The  story 
speaks  of  "  the  tree  of  life  which  was  in  the  midst 
of  the  garden,"  and  plainly  intimates  in  verse  ~2'2 
that  man's  immortality  was  dependent  on  his  par- 
taking of  that  tree.  If  this  were  so,  it  would  seem 
that  his  subjection  to  mortality,  here  spoken  of  as 
to  ensue  upon  the  transgression,  was  to  be  brought 
about,  not  by  any  change  in  his  physical  nature,  by 
or  in  consequence  of  the  disobedience  ;  but  only 
by  his  removal  from  the  opportunity  of  averting 
existing  liability  to  death.  He  was  not  to  be  made 
mortal,  but  only  to  continue  so,  even  as  he  was 
created.  "  Dying  thou  shalt  die,"  seems  to  be  the 
force  of  the  prediction ;  i.  e.,  "  shalt  be  left  inev- 
itably to  die."  And  this  supposition  gathers  addi- 
tional force  when  we  observe  that  the  prescribed 
result  is  announced  as  to  ensue  upon  the  day  in 
which  man  should  partake  of  the  forbidden  fruit. 
Were  "  death "  here  spoken  of  in  the  ordinary 
sense,  the  announcement  was  not  fulfilled ;  for 
man  did  not  on  the  day  of  the  disobedience  actually 
die.  But,  if  our  construction  is  correct,  it  was 
literally  carried  out;  for  on  that  very  day,  mor- 
tality was  fixed  upon  him  as  thenceforth  his  inevi- 
table fate.  And  that  not  as  a  new  condition  appar- 
ently, but  as  the  final  confirmation  of  his  old  one. 


OBJECTIONS   CONSIDERED.  109 

"In  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt  thou  eat  bread 
until  thou  return  (literally,  until  thy  returning) 
unto  the  ground ;  for  out  of  it  thou  wast  taken : 
for  dust  thou  art,  and  unto  dust  shalt  thou  return." 
It  seems  hardly  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  pre- 
scribed continuance  of  the  condition  in  which  Adam 
had  been  created,  and  which  that  fact  and  his  then 
existing  in  it  showed  not  to  be  incompatible  with 
innocence  and  happiness,  should  be  construed  as 
a  threat  of  punishment  in  case  of  his  commiting 
an  offence. 

It  is  worth  remarking,  in  further  support  of  the 
view  we  are  taking,  that  Eve  subsequently  states 
the  command  in  precisely  the  form  in  which  we 
have  above  rendered  it :  "  God  hath  said,  ye  shall 
not  eat  of  it,  lest  ye  die."  In  this  version  of  Eve's, 
it  is  clear  that  she  speaks  of  mortality  as  a  fore- 
warned consequence  rather  than  a  threatened  pun- 
ishment. She  apparently  supposes  it  also  a  natural 
consequence,  for  the  serpent  immediately  replies  to 
her  by  denying  that  such  a  consequence  could  be 
expected  to  ensue  :  "  Ye  shall  not  surely  die :  for 
God  doth  know  that  in  the  day  ye  eat  of  it  (so  far 
from  its  causing  you  to  die,  it  will  cause  that)  ye 
shall  become  as  gods,  knowing  good  and  evil." 
Certainly,  had  the  effect  of  mortality  been  threat- 
ened as  a  penalty  to  be  specially  inflicted  by  the 
Almighty,  such  language  could  only  have  expressed 
to  Eve  a  palpable  absurdity  ;  for  in  that  case  such 
effect  would  lie  exclusively  within  God's  purposes, 


110  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

and  it  would  be  ridiculous  for  a  third  party  to  dis- 
pute the  announcement  of  his  intention,  and  to 
assert  that  He  "  knew  "  a  contrary  result  would  be 
produced.  We  may  add  that  this  rendering  is  still 
further  confirmed,  upon  examination  of  the  sen- 
tence pronounced  upon  man  after  the  disobedience, 
as  we  shall  hereafter  have  occasion  to  show. 

To  the  other  inquiry,  why  an  act  so  desirable 
should  have  been  prohibited,  we  answer :  that 
though  the  acquisition  of  a  moral  faculty  was,  in 
itself  considered,  an  advantage  to  man,  yet  there 
has  also  ensued  to  him,  as  one  result  of  its  posses- 
sion, a  vast  amount  of  evil,  in  the  guilt  and  sin  for 
which  he  has  since  made  himself  answerable,  and 
which  but  for  that  acquisition  could  not  have 
accrued.  The  Creator,  foreseeing  this  sad  result, 
and  foreseeing  therefore  that  the  elevation  of  nature 
to  be  attained  by  man  would  be  speedily  followed 
by  a  fall  in  position,  through  his  subsequent  incur- 
rence  of  moral  guilt,  with  its  attendant  debasement 
and  consequent  misery,  might  well  throw  his  influ- 
ence against  its  attainment.  It  would  be  quite 
consistent,  in  such  view,  that  God  should  authori- 
tatively forbid  the  act  that  would  effect  it,  upon  the 
ground  of  the  tremendous  consequences  involved. 
Such  a  command  could  do  no  injustice  to  man, 
because,  not  being  a  moral  agent,  his  foreseen  diso- 
bedience of  it  could  not  be  an  act  of  guilt.  Neither 
could  it  interfere  with  the  Divine  plan  that  man 
should  in  fact  become  a  moral  agent,  (for  that  this 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  Ill 

was  the  Divine  plan  in  his  creation,  who  can 
doubt  ?)  He  who  foresaw  all  things  from  the  be- 
ginning, needed  not  to  wait  for  the  event  to  be  sure 
of  man's  course,  and  to  know  that  the  act,  though 
prohibited,  would  be  done.  Yet  it  removed  all 
shadow  of  pretence,  that  the  introduction  of  guilt 
and  sin  into  the  world  was  in  any  manner  the  act 
of  God ;  it  being  what  his  influence  had  been  ex- 
pressly exerted  to  avert. 

While,  then,  this  authoritative  prohibition  takes 
away  from  man  all  opportunity  to  cavil,  that  sin, 
moral  evil,  or  even  moral  agency,  of  which  sin  has 
become  in  our  world  the  sad  attendant,  had  been 
brought  into  it  and  imposed  upon  him  by  God's 
agency,  however  remote,  or  with  his  sanction,  how- 
ever indirect,  —  it  does  not  follow,  that  the  act 
which  it  forbade  was  of  course  inconsistent  with 
God's  designs.  To  suppose  this,  under  any  circum- 
stances or  upon  any  interpretation  of  the  narrative, 
would  be  to  hold  that  the  Almighty  had  been  dis- 
appointed and  thwarted  in  his  purposes  in  creating 
man.  It  would  be  the  denial  of  his  foreknowledge. 
It  would  be  derogatory  to  his  wisdom  and  power, 
and  would  be  equally  inconsistent  with  the  com- 
mon, or  any  other  possible  view,  of  the  Transgres- 
sion. Had  it  been  so,  God  would  certainly  never 
have  created  the  race,  foreseeing,  as  he  must  have 
done,  the  actual  result.  Events  constantly  occur  in 
his  providence  contrary  to  the  Divine  commands, 
yet  directly  fulfilling  his  designs.  We  need  scarcely 


112         THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

allude  to  the  death  of  our  Saviour,  which,  as  we 
are  told  in  Acts  ii.  23,  was  "  through  the  deter- 
minate counsel  of  God,"  while  yet  he  was  "  by 
wicked  hands  crucified  and  slain."  So  we  read  of 
Pharaoh,  whose  refusal  to  let  the  people  go  was  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  "  thus  saith  the  Lord,"  and 
yet  in  full  accordance  with  God's  wishes  and  pur- 
poses. And  again,  that  Christ  "  straitly  charged  " 
the  healed  persons  "  that  they  should  tell  no  man," 
although  he  must  have  known  that  "  so  much  the 
more  they  would  proclaim  it." 

We  have  noticed  these  imagined  objections  in 
this  place,  in  order  that  we  might  remove  at  the 
outset  any  prejudice  against  our  view,  by  vindi- 
cating its  consistency  with  reason  and  God's  char- 
acter. It  will  be  observed,  however,  that  the 
agreement  of  our  view  with  Revelation,  is  all  of 
our  present  concern,  and  all  that  we  can  fairly 
be  called  upon  to  make  clear.  Even,  therefore, 
should  teachings  of  the  sacred  narrative  whose 
meaning  shall  be  thus  established,  seem  irrecon- 
cilable with  general  principles,  or  with  the  plans 
which  we  should  be  likely  to  contrive,  it  would 
not  be  incumbent  on  us  to  show  them  consistent. 
Such  difficulty  has  not  been  considered  fatal  to  the 
common  view,  admitted,  and  seemingly  insuperable 
as  it  has  been.  Yet  in  the  light  in  which  we  have 
presented  the  story,  we  apprehend  no  such  conflict. 
We  confidently  appeal  to,  and  rely  on,  these  very 
features  of  consistency  and  simplicity,  which  are  so 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  113 

•wanting  to  the  common  view,  as  among  the  most  re- 
markable confirmations  of  the  interpretation  which 
we  offer.  Not  merely  in  its  general  features,  but 
even  in  its  minutest  details,  it  will  be  found  har- 
monious with  itself,  with  the  honorable  position  of 
our  first  parents  towards  their  posterity,  and  with 
the  justice,  benevolence,  and  wisdom  of  God.  Let 
us  now  return  from  this  digression  to  an  examina- 
tion of  the  narrative. 


114  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  V. 

EXAMINATION   OF  THE  NARRATIVE  CONTINUED.     THE 
DISOBEDIENCE. 

PROCEEDING  with  the  narrative,  as  we  examine 
its  account  of  the  conduct  of  our  first  parents,  in 
the  various  particulars  connected  with  their  act  of 
disobedience^  we  shall  find  nothing  to  discredit,  but 
much  to  support,  the  views  we  have  presented. 
Everything  which  can  tend  to  throw  light  upon  the 
nature  and  circumstances  of  that  great  transaction, 
so  unparalleled  in  its  character,  and  so  momentous 
in  its  results,  must  always  be  deeply  interesting : 
especially  since,  in  the  light  in  which  we  have  been 
accustomed  to  contemplate  it,  with  reference  to  the 
conduct  of  our  first  parents,  there  is  none  related 
in  history  so  utterly  inexplicable,  so  diverse  from 
every  natural  expectation,  and  from  the  ordinary 
conduct  of  men.  Let  us  consider  for  a  moment  the 
manner  in  which  the  usual  view  presents  them. 

It  shows  us,  then,  two  human  beings  endowed 
with  every  perfection  of  mind  and  body,  in  the  foil 
exercise  of  a  sound  judgment,  as  a  part  of  a  vigor- 
ous and  active  intellect ;  righteous  from  voluntary 
choice ;  knowing  well,  and  viewing  with  loathing  and 
fear,  the  degradation  and  misery  of  sin ;  and  in  the 


THE  DISOBEDIENCE.  115 

enjoyment  of  every  happiness  from  the  bountiful 
hand  of  that  Creator  with  whom  they  were  not  only 
living  in  daily  and  confiding  intercourse,  but  to 
whom  they  saw  and  felt  themselves  united  by  every 
tie  of  reverence,  gratitude,  and  affection.  Immense, 
indeed,  we  should  exclaim,  must  be  the  incitement 
which  could  tempt  them  to  relinquish  such  bless- 
ings I  Inconceivable  the  form  and  the  power  of 
the  temptation  that  could  draw  them  from  their 
chosen  duty !  Yet  we  are  told  that  these  intelligent 
and  holy  beings,  upon  the  very  first  suggestion,  vol- 
untarily forsook  all  this  happiness  and  virtue ;  delib- 
erately committed  the  single  act  upon  which  they 
knew  their  destiny  hung ;  abandoned  their  beloved 
Creator,  benefactor  and  friend,  at  once,  upon  the 
bare  and  unsupported  assertion  of  an  inferior  "  beast " 
and  reptile,  that  He  had  lied  to  them,  and  was  jeal- 
ous of  their  advancement,  —  He,  who  was  heaping 
blessings  and  honors  upon  them  continually !  That 
they  perpetrated  this,  their  first  and  thus  momentous 
sin,  upon  reflection,  in  full  view  of  its  heinousness, 
and  all  its  awful  consequences,  yet  apparently  with 
scarcely  a  rising  hesitation,  and  without  the  smallest 
recorded  struggle  of  awakening  conscience  !  And 
upon  what  inducement  ?  To  obtain  an  experimental 
acquaintance  with  sin  and  sorrow  and  evil ;  for  this, 
with  their  existing  experience  of  "  good,"  and  intel- 
lectual apprehension  of  sin,  (which  moral  beings 
must  possess,)  was  all  that  was  offered  them !  Is 
all  this  credible  ?  Could  we  comprehend  such  reck- 


116  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

less  folly  in  even  a.  fallen  human  being  of  the  pres- 
ent day  ?  Will  "  curiosity  "  explain  it  ?  Do  men, 
then,  show  such  insatiate  curiosity  to  partake  of 
known  and  deadly  poison  ?  Will  "  ambition  "  ac- 
count for  it  ?  It  is  true  that  the  woman  partook, 
because  she  "  saw  it  was  a  tree  to  be  desired  to 
make  one  wise-"  ;  but  if  the  common  view  is  right, 
the  only  "  wisdom  "  it  could  impart,  would  be  the 
wisdom  that  attends  destruction;  and  is  there  in- 
deed an  ambition  for  misery  and  ruin  ?  Nay, 
more  !  could  a  man  ever,  (at  least,  since  this  period 
of  perfect  and  voluntary  rectitude  passed  away,) 
without  a  single  struggle,  yea,  without  a  terrible 
and  long-protracted  war  with  conscience,  have  com- 
mitted as  his  first  sin,  that  very  one  upon  which  he 
knew  his  earthly  life,  his  eternal  fate,  and  the  des- 
tiny of  his  race  were  suspended  ?  And  can  it  be 
that  perfectly  holy  beings  would  falsify  the  truth 
which  even  of  "  degenerate  "  humanity  has  for  ages 
been  recognized  in  the  proverb,  —  "Nemo  repente 
fit  turpissimus  ?  "  Surely  these  objections  are  insu- 
perable. Yet  these  are  only  a  portion  of  the  diffi- 
culties that  invest  the  story,  in  regard  to  this  first 
act  of  disobedience,  under  its  ordinary  interpreta- 
tion. If  any  other  view  shall  present  as  great,  let 
it  by  all  means  be  rejected  ! 

Had  Adam  and  Eve  been  moral  beings,  it  is  in- 
conceivable but  that  at  their  first  temptation  the  sin 
of  disobedience  should  have  constituted  the  first  and 
strongest  objection  to  it  in  their  minds  —  the  centre 


THE  DISOBEDIENCE.  117 

and  focus  of  their  resistance.  And  had  there,  in 
fact,  been  a  conflict  of  this  kind  within  them,  it 
would  certainly  have  been  at  least  hinted  at  by  the 
inspired  writer,  in  referring,  as  he  has,  to  the  emo- 
tions and  deliberations  under  which  the  act  was 
committed.  Milton,  though  obviously  embarrassed 
and  hampered  by  the  plain  teachings  of  the  text,  is 
yet  not  so  unmindful  of  human  nature,  and  of  prob- 
ability, as  to  neglect  this  consideration  of  conscien- 
tious scruples,  and  accordingly  represents  Eve  as 
attempting  to  reason  down  conscience  by  a  very 
refined  moral  abstraction, — 

"  In  plain,  then,  what  forbids  He,  but  to  know  ? 
Forbids  us  good !  forbids  us  to  be  wise ! 
Such  prohibitions  bind  not." 

And  the  same  poet  depicts  Adam  as  dwelling 
more  fully  and  at  large  upon  the  moral  aspect  of 
the  contemplated  deed.  Yet  we  find  no  such  sug- 
gestions alluded  to  in  the  Scripture  account,  nor 
anything  of  the  manifold  other  accessories  which 
the  Poet's  imagination  has  felt  itself  constrained  to 
supply,  in  order  to  color  its  representations  with  the 
hues  of  probability. 

On  the  contrary,  the  whole  transaction  as  nar- 
rated in  the  sacred  record,  is  marked  with  the  sim- 
plicity, and  evinces  the  innocence,  of  childhood :  — 

"  l!^ow  the  serpent  was  more  subtile  than  any  beast  of  the 
field  which  the  Lord  God  had  made.  And  he  said  unto  the 
woman,  Yea,  hath  God  said,  Ye  shall  not  eat  of  every  tree 
of  the  garden  ?  And  the  woman  said  unto  the  serpent,  We 
may  eat  of  the  fruit  of  the  trees  of  the  garden :  but  of  the 


118  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

fruit  of  the  tree  which  is  in  the  midst  of  the  garden,  God  hath 
said,  Ye  shall  not  eat  of  it,  neither  shall  ye  touch  it,  lest  ye  die. 
And  the  serpent  said  unto  the  woman,  Ye  shall  not  surely  die : 
for  God  doth  know  that  in  the  day  ye  eat  thereof,  then  your 
eyes  shall  be  opened;  and  ye  shall  be  as  gods,  (ELOHIM,  God,) 
knowing  good  and  evil.  And  when  the  woman  saw  that  the 
tree  was  good  for  food,  and  that  it  was  pleasant  to  the  eyes, 
and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise,  (lit.  to  cause  to  un- 
derstand,) she  took  of  the  fruit  thereof,  and  did  eat ;  and  gave 
also  unto  her  husband  with  her ;  and  he  did  eat."— (Ch.  iii.  1.) 

Here  we  see  Eve,  in  reply  to  the  first  approaches 
of  the  serpent,  all  unconscious  of  his  designs,  an- 
swering his  inquiry  with  candor  and  truth.  She 
repels  his  covert  insinuation  of  unreasonableness  in 
God's  command,  and  states  fully  and  fairly  its  im- 
port and  alternative.  As  before  remarked,  she 
seems  to  state  the  latter  as  a  natural  consequence 
rather  than  a. threat  of  punishment,  (certainly  the 
serpent  so  understands  her,)  which  she  had  no  mo- 
tive to  do,  unless  she  supposed  it  to  be  thus  pre- 
sented. Nowhere  is  there  the  least  indication  of  a 
disposition  on  her  part  to  misrepresent  or  equivocate, 
but  the  reverse ;  and  if,  as  some  commentators  try 
to  imagine,  discontent  were  already  rising  in  her 
heart,  she  would  have  been  more  likely  to  have  ob- 
scured the  terms  of  the  mandate,  and  to  have  colored 
the  penalty  with  the  strongest  hues  of  a  complaining 
spirit.  The  whole  effect,  indeed,  of  the  command, 
as  here  recited  by  Eve,  and  apparently  understood 
by  her,  is  that  of  a  benevolent  warning,  connected 
with  a  general  and  kind  permission ;  she  says : 


THE  DISOBEDIENCE.  119 

"  Serpent,  you  are  wrong  in  your  suggestion.  We 
may  eat  of  the  fruit  of  the  trees  of  the  garden  ;  all 
are  free  to  us.  Of  one  only,  which  stands  in  the 
midst  of  the  garden,  God  has  warned  and  enjoined 
us  not  to  eat  of  it,  or  touch  it,  lest  we  die." 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  true  import  of 
Eve's  reply,  the  serpent  obviously  perceives  in  her 
mind  no  objections  of  a  moral  nature  against  diso- 
bedience, for  he  responds,  not  in  the  usual  style  of 
the  tempter,  by  persuading  her  that  the  sin  would 
be  venial,  or  that 

"  Such  prohibitions  bind  not; " 

but  solely  to  the  suggestion  of  the  consequences,  as 
the  only  argument,  seemingly,  which  required  to  be 
met.  And  as  we  have  before  noticed,  the  serpent 
alludes  to  these  consequences  as  something  within 
God's  knowledge,  rather  than  his  intentions;  and 
therefore  as  an  effect,  rather  than  a  punishment :  — 

"  Ye  shall  not  surely  die :  for  God  doth  know  that  in  the 
day  ye  eat  thereof,  then  your  eyes  shall  be  opened ;  and  ye 
shall  be  as  ELOHIM,  knowing  good  and  evil." 

Such  an  assurance  as  this  could  have  had  little 
effect  to  deceive  Eve,  had  mortality  been  under- 
stood by  her  to  be  a  threatened  penalty  for  the  act 
prohibited,  since  in  such  case  no  assertion  of  a  third 
and  inferior  party  could  discredit  the  threat,  as  no 
power  of  his  could  prevent  its  execution.  It  would 
seem,  on  the  contrary,  had  she  really  been  a  moral 
and  a  holy  being,  that  such  an  open  and  flagrant 


120  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

insult  upon  her  Parent  and  Friend,  these  base  as- 
persions of  his  veracity  and  affection,  and  this 
calumnious  imputation  against  him  of  a  mean  jeal- 
ousy of  his  children,  would  have  agitated  her  with 
indignation  and  horror,  and  driven  her  from  the 
presence  of  the  tempter.  Such,  at  least,  would  be 
their  natural  effect  upon  a  human  mind  not  utterly 
debased,  as  humanity  is  at  present  constituted.  Yet 
we  find  no  intimation  that  they  in  the  least  dis- 
turbed her  tranquillity,  or  awakened  her  suspicions  ; 
a  fact  inexplicable,  except  upon  the  supposition  that 
she  was  incapable  of  appreciating  their  wickedness. 

But  apart  from  these  objections  to  the  common 
interpretation  that  are  suggested  by  the  serpent's 
reply,  it  seems  impossible,  under  that  interpretation, 
that  it  should  have  presented  to  Eve's  mind  any  in- 
telligible idea  whatever  that  could  have  influenced 
her  as  a  temptation,  or  inducement,  to  the  sin  of  dis- 
obedience. Eve,  it  appears  from  the  story,  paused 
and  reflected  upon  the  considerations  for  and  against 
the  suggestions  of  the  serpent.  Indeed,  it  seems 
certain  that  the  actual  transgression  occurred  at  a 
different  time  from  that  of  this  interview,  and 
when,  having  consulted  with  her  husband,  she  had 
brought  him  with  her  to  the  tree,  —  an  idea  ac- 
cordingly which  most  commentators  support.  At 
all  events,  it  was  not  until  she  "  saw  that  the  tree 
was  good  for  food,  and  that  it  was  pleasant  [or  "  a 
desire"]  to  the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to 
make  one  wise,  that  "  she  took  of  the  fruit  thereof, 


THE     DISOBEDIENCE.  121 

and  did  eat."  Upon  the  common  view,  it  would 
seem  difficult  for  her  to  have  formed  so  favorable  an 
opinion  of  the  properties  of  the  tree  in  its  capacity 
for  imparting  "  wisdom  "  (by  which  we  must  under- 
stand, of  course,  desirable  knowledge).  Reflecting 
upon  the  serpent's  proposition,  her  deliberations 
could  hardly  have  failed  to  run  somewhat  thus : 
"  The  serpent  assures  me  that  our  eyes  shall  be 
opened,  and  we  shall  be  like  ELOHIM,  *  knowing  good 
and  evil.'  Does  he  mean  by  '  good  and  evil,'  that 
which  is  moral,  or  that  which  is  physical  and  mate- 
rial ?  Yet,  of  what  importance  can  it  be  which  he 
intends  ?  for  in  either  case,  what  new  and  desirable 
experience  or  knowledge  could  accrue  to  us  ?  Every 
material,  and  all  moral  good,  we  already  actually 
enjoy,  and  of  course  have  the  capacity  to  compre- 
hend it  also ;  and  though  we  have  never  yet  known 
any  kind  of  evil  as  an  experience,  yet  we  have  a 
sufficient  intellectual  appreciation  and  conception  of 
its  character,  as  in  contrast  with  good,  to  see  that  it 
is  something  which  our  souls  shrink  from,  and  which 
it  is  desirable  should  be  avoided.  He  offers  us,  then, 
no  new  knowledge,  except  that  which  we  have  no 
desire  to  possess ;  and  shall  I  disobey  my  Creator 
for  that  ?  Besides,  how  could  an  acquaintance  such 
as  the  serpent  proposes,  with  good  and  evil,  with  evil 
as  well  as  good,  (whether  the  evil  be  material  or 
moral,)  increase  our  resemblance  to  ELOHIM  ?  since 
we  already  '  know '  them  both,  precisely  as  He 
does,  not  in  our  experience,  but  sufficiently  in  our 


122  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

conceptions.  Clear  it  is,  that  no  new  knowledge 
can  be  imparted  by  the  tree,  or  if  any,  it  must  be 
such  as  would  make  us  wretched,  and  diminish 
rather  than  promote  our  likeness  to  our  Maker." 
So  obvious  a  process  of  reasoning,  certainly  does 
not  seem  improbable  in  beings  of  the  high  endow- 
ments which  are  attributed  to  our  first  parents  before 
the  fall,  while  the  conclusions  to  which  it  leads,  are 
manifestly  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  course  of 
conduct  which  they  adopted. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  view  we  are  urging  rec- 
onciles the  story  with  itself,  with  probability,  and 
with  the  instincts  of  human  nature  :  for  it  presents 
in  this  reply  of  the  serpent  a  real  temptation  to  a 
partaking  of  the  fruit ;  and  fully  accounts  for  Eve's 
slight  hesitation,  if  any  there  was,  since  her  want 
of  a  moral  sense  would  oppose  to  it  no  conscientious 
repugnance.  According  to  our  view,  she  might  be 
supposed  to  reason  thus  upon  the  proposition  of  the 
tempter :  "  The  serpent  is  clearly  right  in  saying 
that  the  tree  will  convey  to  us  the  apprehension  of 
right  and  wrong,  for  that  its  very  name,  given  by 
God  himself,  indicates.  Surely,  to  possess  this  mys- 
terious knowledge,  whatever  it  may  be,  this  mental 
illumination  and  power,  so  incomprehensible,  so  di- 
vine, were,  indeed,  to  increase  our  resemblance  to 
God's  infinite  nature,  and  to  make  a  great  step 
upward !  What  can  that  knowledge  be  ?  What 
strange  joys  and  blessings  may  not  be  involved  in 
it  ?  Hurtful  it  cannot  be,  for  God  possesses  it,  and 


THE  DISOBEDIENCE.  123 

he  is  only  blessed  and  glorious.  True,  he  has  for- 
bidden us  its  acquisition ;  but  why  ?  *  Lest  we 
die.'  But  how  can  the  knowledge  of  right  and 
wrong  occasion  us  to  die  ?  The  serpent  positively 
assures  us  it  will  not ;  and  if  he  is  right,  as  he  plainly 
is,  in  stating  one  result  of  the  fruit,  may  he  not  also 
be  correct,  and  God  mistaken,  with  regard  to  this  ? 
He  gives  a  reason,  too,  for  his  assertion,  —  '  Ye  shall 
not  surely  die,'  he  says,  '/or  ye  shall  be  as  ELOHIM, 
knowing  good  and  evil,'  as  if  the  knowing  good  and 
evil,  like  ELOHIM,  were  in  itself  a  reason  and  a  proof 
against  the  result  of  mortality.  And  is  it  not  so  ? 
Has  this  knowledge  made  God  to  die  ?  Then,  why 
ourselves,  who  are  made  in  his  image  ?  On  the 
other  hand,  the  brutes  who  do  not  possess  it,  differ- 
ing therein  from  ELOHIM,  differ  also  in  this,  that 
they  are  mortal,  for  so  the  bones  and  fragments  of 
their  perished  races  show  us.  May  not,  then,  this 
unknown  power  of  knowing  right  and  wrong,  be 
that  which  ensures  to  its  possessor  exemption  from 
death,  instead  of  liability  to  it  ?  It  is  all  we  need 
to  perfect  our  similitude  to  our  Creator ;  and  should 
it  complete  the  resemblance  in  respect  to  this  knowl- 
edge of  right  and  wrong,  and  in  respect  to  the  cer- 
tainty of  eternal  life  besides,  then  this  is,  indeed,  a 
tree  at  once  good  for  food,  and  pleasant  to  the  eyes, 
and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise  I  " 

There  is  surely  nothing  forced  in  this  chain  of 
reasoning,  as  the  supposed  meditations  of  an  intel- 
ligent creature,  not  a  moral  agent,  and  so  incapable 


124  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

of  seeing  anything  improper  to  be  indulged  in  its 
imputations  upon  God's  knowledge  or  veracity.  To 
such  a  being,  the  antagonism  of  God's  allegations 
to  those  of  the  serpent,  would  seem  simply  a  differ- 
ence of  opinion,  or  a  mere  discrepancy  of  state- 
ment ;  and  between  the  two,  that  would  receive  the 
most  credit  which  seemed  to  be  the  most  plausible, 
or  best  corroborated.  The  question  of  expediency  is, 
at  all  events,  the  only  one  upon  which  the  narrative 
represents  Eve  as  pausing  to  deliberate,  —  a  circum- 
stance which,  as  we  have  before  suggested,  is  hardly 
conceivable  of  a  holy  being  hesitating  over  her  first 
temptation,  and  that,  one  of  such  tremendous  mo- 
ment. When  this  inquiry  seemed  plausibly  dis- 
posed of;  when  she  saw,  or  supposed  she  saw, 
u  that  the  tree  was  good  for  food,  and  pleasant  to 
the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one 
wise,"  both  she  and  her  husband  unhesitatingly  par- 
took of  its  fruit,  without  the  faintest  recorded  move- 
ment of  conscience  to  restrain  them.  "  She  gave 
to  her  husband  also,  and  he  did  eat."  They  seem 
to  have  acted  throughout  like  artless  children,  who 
are  readily  enticed  to  acts  agreeable  in  the  prospect, 
so  long  as  they  are  ignorant  of  their  moral  charac- 
ter, and  incapable  of  discerning  it.1 

1  Paul  says,  1  Tim.  ii.  14,  that  "  Adam  was  not  deceived,  but  Eve 
being  deceived,  was  in  the  trangression  "  (jrapa£<i<rei).  His  precise 
meaning  in  this  passage  is  somewhat  obscure.  It  would  seem  to  fol- 
low from  the  statement  that  Adam  (if  the  trangression  were  a  sin)  was 
the  least  excusable  of  the  pair.  It  will  be  noticed,  however,  that  in 
any  light,  this  remark  of  Paul's  does  not  militate  against  our  view 


THE  DISOBEDIENCE.  125 

Some  other  considerations  in  this  connection 
ought  not  to  be  overlooked.  The  narrative  plainly 
teaches  that  the  temptation  was  first  addressed  to 
Eve  when  she  was  alone  ;  that  it  was  not  imme- 
diately acted  upon  by  her,  but  dwelt  in  her  mind 
until  a  subsequent  occasion,  when,  Adam  being 
present,  she  partook  of  the  fruit,  and  persuaded 
him  to  do  likewise.  Of  the  latter  fact,  indeed, 
there  can  be  no  question,  since  God  himself  asserts 
it  in  the  remark :  "  Because  thou  hast  hearkened 
unto  the  voice  of  thy  wife,  and  hast  eaten,"  &c.  It 
thus  appears :  1st,  that  the  disobedience  was  upon 
full  and  deliberation  reflection,  at  least  upon  the 
part  of  Eve  ;  and  2d,  that  the  tempter  in  his 
"  subtlety  "  approached  her  first,  as  the  most  likely 
to  be  "  beguiled  "  into  the  act  of  disobedience.  Yet 
upon  the  common  view  of  the  temptation,  as  direct 
advice  to  sin  in  order  to  attain  increase  of  knowl- 
edge, it  seems  very  inartfully  presented.  The  ap- 
peal to  intellectual  ambition  was  a  weak  one  to 
press  upon  a  woman's  mind,  though  it  might  pre- 
sent a  powerful  incitement  to  an  intelligent,  nobly 
constituted  man  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  sug- 
gestion of  sinful  disobedience  (even  for  a  tempting 
object)  would  be  less  likely  to  succeed  with  a  woman, 

since  his  language  does  not  import  sinfulness  in  "  the  transgression." 
And  farther,  that  Paul  appends  it  as  a  reason  for  what  he  has  just  ad- 
vanced upon  his  own  authority,  and  not  by  inspiration;  viz.,  v.  12: 
u  I  suffer  not  the  woman  to  usurp  authority  over  the  man,  but  to  be  in 
silence."  As  such,  it  certainly  looks  like  an  illogical  argument,  for  what 
many  in  our  day  will,  doubtless,  regard  as  very  questionable  doctrine. 


126  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

in  whom  conscience,  trustfulness,  and  the  spirit  of 
obedience  are  naturally  much  more  than  in  the  other 
sex  influential  upon  conduct.  But  upon  our  suppo- 
sition that  the  temptation  involved  a  fallacy  merely, 
and  no  suggestion  of  guilt,  it  was  appropriate  that 
Eve  should  be  first  approached  by  the  tempter, 
since  her  judgment  was  weaker  than  Adam's,  and 
the  appeal  was  quite  as  strongly  addressed  to  wom- 
anly curiosity  as  to  manly  ambition  ;  while  the  wife, 
if  gained  over,  would  be  a  powerful  agency  in  per- 
suading the  husband.  In  fact,  it  appears  from  the 
narrative  that  it  was  chiefly  this  female  character- 
istic—  curiosity,  which  influenced  Eve,  —  the  stim- 
ulus of  mental  ambition  being  in  her  case  subordi- 
nate, though  probably  a  leading  motive  with  Adam. 
She  ate  because  "  she  saw  that  the  tree  was  good 
for  food  and  pleasant  to  the  eyes,"  as  well,  as  "  a 
tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise,"  and  then 
**  gave  to  her  husband  with  her,  and  he  did  eat." 

And  thus  the  great  transaction  was  consummated. 
Whatever  may  have  been  the  previous  character 
and  position  of  our  first  parents,  or  the  precise 
nature  of  the  change  that  was  effected  bv  this  act 

o  •/ 

within  them,  there  will  be  little  dispute  that  it  occa- 
sioned, in  some  way  or  other,  the  most  remarkable 
and  important  revolution  that  humanity  has  ever 
undergone.  By  it  was  wrought  that  momentous 
change,  whatever  it  may  have  been,  that  altered  at 
once  the  personal  relations  of  man  to  his  Maker, 
and  fixed  the  future  destinies  of  the  whole  human 


THE    DISOBEDIENCE.  127 

race.  The  history  of  man's  career  dates  from  the 
moment  of  its  perpetration  ;  for  that  moment  it  was, 
by  all  admissions,  which  gave  him  that  direction, 
and  those  qualities  of  character,  which  have  deter- 
mined his  whole  course  as  a  race,  and  his  destiny. 
Thenceforth,  relying  no  longer  on  the  constant  com- 
panionship of  his  Maker  to  direct  his  conduct,  he 
was  left  to  look  chiefly  within  his  own  breast  for  the 
monitor  of  his  thoughts  and  actions,  and  for  the 
familiar  expositor  of  that  law  to  which  he  was  to  be 
held  accountable.  This,  it  is  agreed  by  all,  was 
one  result,  —  was  in  fact  the  great  result  of  the  act 
we  have  contemplated.  Shall  we  suppose  this  with- 
drawal of  God's  immediate  supervision  to  have  been 
because  his  children  were  fairly  embarked  on  the 
fearful  current  of  moral  ruin,  (whereby  they  would 
seem  to  need  that  care  the  more,)  or  rather  because 
they  had  now  attained  that  moral  discernment  which 
in  a  measure  dispensed  with  his  counsel,  and  had 
reached  that  position  of  free  and  intelligent  moral 
agency,  for  which  at  their  creation  He  had  designed 
them  ? 

For  answer,  we  look  not  alone  to  the  goodness 
and  benevolence  of  God's  character,  but  also  to  his 
revelation,  in  the  narrative  whose  consideration  we 
continue. 


128  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

EXAMINATION   OF  THE   NARRATIVE   CONTINUED.    THE 
EFFECTS  OF  THE  FORBIDDEN  FRUIT. 

IN  seeking  an  answer  to  the  inquiry  just  sug- 
gested, we  come  next  to  examine  the  circumstances 
which  are  related  to  have  succeeded  the  disobedient 
action,  as  its  actual  and  necessary  consequences. 

The  next  sentence  to  that  which  relates  the  par- 
taking of  the  forbidden  fruit,  declares  its  immediate 
and  marvellous  effect :  — 

"And  the  eyes  of  them  both  were  opened,  and  they  knew 
that  they  were  naked ;  and  they  sewed  fig-leaves  together  and 
made  themselves  aprons."  (Chap.  iii.  7.) 

The  effect  thus  wrought  seems  to  have  been  the 
complete  effect  of  the  fruit,  for  no  other  results  are 
alluded  to,  and  no  others  ensued,  except  such  as 
were  afterwards  specially  imposed  by  the  Creator. 
The  Almighty  himself  obviously  announces  this  to 
have  been  the  fact  in  verse  22,  where  he  says, 
"  Behold,  the  man  is  become  as  one  of  us,"  etc. ; 
plainly  implying  that  the  whole  change  which  the 
fruit  could  produce  in  man's  nature  had  occurred ; 
and  necessarily  implying  that  that  change  was  the 
one  indicated  in  verse  7,  which  we  are  considering. 
The  immediateness,  completeness,  and  the  char- 


EFFECTS   OF  THE  FORBIDDEN  FRUIT.  129 

acter  of  this  related  effect,  are  noticeable,  as  being 
inconsistent  with  those  theories  which  hold  that  the 
change  produced  in  man  by  the  disobedience  was 
such  as  time  and  experience  only  could  reveal. 
We  find  here,  therefore,  no  support  for  the  idea 
that  it  wrought  the  loss  of  constitutional  moral  ex- 
cellence, or  of  the  ability  to  maintain  moral  perfec- 
tion ;  none  for  the  doctrine  that  it  merely  exhibited 
the  certainty  of  man's  sinfulness,  through  his  first 
development  of  character;  and  as  little  for  the 
fancy  that  the  fruit  may  have  effected  a  deteriora- 
tion in  man's  physical  nature,  reducing  it  to  the 
level  of  suffering  and  mortality.  At  present,  how- 
ever, we  are  more  concerned  with  the  inquiry  what 
light  this  part  of  the  story  sheds  upon  man's  pre- 
vious moral  nature,  and  what  change  in  this  respect 
it  indicates  to  have  been  actually  produced. 

When,  therefore,  the  deed  is  done,  the  fatal  sin, 
as  it  is  called,  committed,  how  are  the  actors 
affected  ?  At  once  "  their  eyes  are  opened,"  and  to 
what  purpose  ?  Is  it  —  as  the  common  view  would 
teach  —  an  awakening  from  the  infatuation  of  wick- 
edness to  an  awful  and  overwhelming  sense  of 
guilt  ?  Are  they  then  crushed  in  the  dust  with 
remorse  and  terror?  with  the  pangs  of  self- 
reproach  ?  with  humiliation  and  distress  ?  None 
of  these.  As  little  do  they  manifest  the  symptoms 
of  newly  infused  corruption,  and  rush  immediately 
into  the  practice  of  sin.  Milton,  indeed,  ignoring 
the  facts  of  the  narrative,  represents  their  first 
9 


130  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

emotions  as  those  of  sinful  passion.  The  story, 
on  the  other  hand,  reveals  them  as  the  feelings  of 
simplicity  and  purity.  "  Their  eyes  were  opened," 
not  to  agony  and  remorse  for  their  disobedience, 
not  to  new  seductions  of  appetite,  but  to  the  prompt- 
ings of  modesty,  and  to  make  themselves  a  covering. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  the  supporters  of  the 
ordinary  view,  that  the  phrase,  "  They  knew  that 
they  were  naked,"  indicates  the  advent  of  impure 
emotions  to  the  minds  of  our  first  parents,  who 
had  been  previously  so  holy  as  to  be  indifferent  to 
the  circumstance  of  their  want  of  bodily  clothing. 
The  making  for  themselves  aprons,  it  is  said,  mani- 
fests the  resistance  of  their  lingering  virtue  against 
this  impurity.  If  this  is  so,  it  is  most  strange  that 
the  story  has  not  presented  these  truths  in  a  more 
clear  and  natural  way ;  but  that  it  is  not  so,  and 
that  this  is  a  forced  and  improbable  explanation  of 
the  passage,  will  appear  from  several  considerations. 

In  the  first  place,  the  expression,  "  their  eyes 
were  opened,"  can  by  no  just  construction  be  made 
to  imply  the  inroad  of  sinful  emotions.  It  is  no- 
where so  used  in  Scripture.  On  the  contrary,  it 
always  implies  a  mental  illumination,  —  the  attain- 
ment of  desirable  knowledge,  —  while  sin  is  called 
a  blindness.  "  Their  eyes  have  they  closed,  and 
their  ears  are  dull  of  hearing,"  says  the  Prophet 
Isaiah,  in  speaking  of  the  wilful  wickedness  of 
Israel,  "  lest  they  should  see  with  their  eyes,"  etc., 
"  and  be  converted,  and  I  should  heal  them."  The 


EFFECTS  OF  THE  FORBIDDEN  FRUIT.  131 

Psalmist  cries,  (Psalm  cxix.  18,)  praying  for  the 
enlightenment  of  his  moral  perceptions,  —  "  Open 
thou  mine  eyes,  that  I  may  behold  wondrous  things 
out  of  thy  law  "  ;  and  so  in  numerous  other  passages. 
Now  in  the  light  of  these  premises,  let  us  examine 
the  common  idea  of  this  passage.  It  is  certain  and 
admitted  that  Adam  and  Eve  attained  some  new 
perceptions,  not  with  regard  to  the  mere  physical 
fact  of  their  nudity,  for  this  they  must  have  fully 
comprehended  before  ;  but  with  regard  to  a  pre- 
viously unimagined  significance  in  that  fact,  and  a 
new  effect  of  its  contemplation  upon  themselves. 
And  what,  upon  the  ordinary  view,  were  these  new 
suggestions  ?  Not,  surely,  that  a  state  of  nudity  was 
in  itself  improper  in  moral  beings,  for  God  had  al- 
lowed them  theretofore  to  continue  unclothed.  Not 
that  it  in  itself  tended  to  awaken  impure  emotions 
in  moral  creatures,  for  such  had  never  before  been 
their  experience.  The  discovery  must  therefore 
have  been,  merely,  that  this  condition,  now  for  the 
first  time,  excited  within  them  impure  and  immoral 
emotions.  It  was  simply  then  (as  the  view  would 
imply)  a  discovery  that  they  had  suddenly  become 
more  easily  corrupted,  more  subject  to  the  control 
of  debasing  appetites  than  before,  and  this  discov- 
ery must  have  been  through  the  actual  upris- 
ing and  prevalence  of  those  passions  within  their 
breasts.  But  as  we  have  already  seen,  no  such 
experience  of  sin  can  be  intended  by  the  phrase, 
"  their  eyes  were  opened,"  —  a  phrase  used  only  to 


132  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

convey  a  totally  opposite  signification.  Nor  is  this 
the  only  objection.  Apart  from  all  this,  the  ex- 
pression fairly  denotes  an  improvement  in  the  men- 
tal vision,  whereby  it  is  strengthened  or  cleared  up, 
to  discern  things  previously  in  existence,  but  undis- 
tinguished ;  and  can  by  no  just  use  of  language 
be  employed  to  describe  the  total  change  of  a  man's 
circumstances,  with  his  natural  recognition  simply 
of  that  change  and  its  consequences.  It  describes 
the  enabling  of  a  blind  man  to  see  the  things 
already  about  or  within  him,  and  not  the  removal 
of  one  who  sees  to  a  different  sphere,  where  his 
eye  merely  rests  upon  new  objects  of  vision. 

Again.  It  is  incredible  that  indifference  to  a 
condition  of  nudity  could  be  a  result  or  accompa- 
niment of  the  highest  purity  in  a  free  moral  agent. 
Such  an  idea  is  neither  sanctioned  by  reason  nor  by 
observation.  In  a  being  free  to  sin,  the  practice  of 
whatever  tends  to  excite  or  foster  natural  passion 
is  incompatible  with  the  highest  state  of  holiness. 
The  purest  and  holiest  creatures  of  earth,  so  far 
from  being  the  most  indifferent,  are  the  most  sensi- 
tively delicate  and  modest ;  and  it  needs  no  argu- 
ment to  show  that  the  baser  passions  would  be 
more  likely  to  prevail  among  men,  however  holy, 
if  all  went  naked  like  the  brutes,  than  if  they  de- 
cently covered  themselves  with  clothing.  Indeed, 
a  common  brute  nudity  can  scarcely  be  thought  of, 
except  as  accompanied  by  brute-like  prevalence 
and  shamelessness  of  passion.  Such  is  its  notorious 


EFFECTS   OF  THE  FORBIDDEN  FRUIT.  133 

influence  among  the  filthy  savage  races,  who  alone 
exhibit  it  in  practice,  —  the  lowest  representatives 
of  humanity,  —  the  farthest  conceivable  from  holy 
beings,  —  so  lost  to  moral  purity  as  to  seem  almost 
destitute  of  a  moral  sense.  The  only  other  human 
beings  who  are  indifferent,  are  infants  too  young  to 
comprehend  moral  distinctions  ;  and  in  both  these 
classes,  no  sooner  does  conscience  begin  to  appear, 
than  this  instinct  of  modesty  awakens ;  "  their  eyes 
are  opened,"  "  they  know  that  they  are  naked," 
and  "  they  are  ashamed." l  How  unaccountable 
upon  the  common  view,  and  how  consistent  with 
that  which  we  are  sustaining,  that  the  first  emotion 
of  our  first  parents  after  their  disobedience,  should 
be  that  instinctive  and  delicate  modesty  which  ac- 
companies the  earliest  presence  of  the  moral  sense  ! 
How  forcible  a  commentary  upon  the  purport  of  the 
recorded  fact,  that,  before  that  act  of  disobedience, 
they  had  been  "both  naked,  the  man  and  his 
wife,"  and  "  knew  not  what  shame  was  !  "  That 
this  new  feeling  was  no  sinful  prompting,  but  in 
accordance  with  the  dictates  of  purity  and  modesty, 
is  clear,  for  God  himself  afterwards  sanctioned  it, 
by  clothing  them  in  a  more  perfect  manner.  Nei- 
ther here,  nor  elsewhere  in  the  narrative,  do  we 

1  Missionaries  among  the  degraded  savages  of  South  Africa  assert, 
that  the  first  indication  afforded  by  these  almost  naked  barbarians  of 
the  awakening  of  religious  feeling  in  their  hearts,  is  their  application 
for  the  most  essential  articles  of  clothing.  When  a  native  comes  to 
ask  for  a  shirt,  it  is  an  almost  unerring  sign  that  he  is  spiritually 
awakened,  and  is  ready  to  put  on  the  garment  of  righteousness. 


134  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

find  the  least  hint  of  a  sudden  degradation,  or  of 
the  incoming  of  new  depravity. 

Once  more.  A  decisive  refutation  of  this  doctrine 
of  incoming  impurity  found  in  verse  7,  appears  in 
verse  22,  already  quoted ;  where  God,  speaking  of 
the  effect  produced  by  the  fruit,  says,  "  Behold, 
the  man  is  become  as  one  of  us,  to  know  good  and 
evil "  (i.  e.,  right  and  wrong).  The  change  here 
referred  to  as  having  already  taken  place,  is  mani- 
festly that  which  occurred  when  his  "  eyes  were 
opened,"  and  "  he  knew  that  he  was  naked." 
The  "  knowledge  that  he  was  naked,"  then,  was 
associated  with  his  new  acquirement  of  "  the  knowl- 
edge of  good  and  evil,"  and  was  in  itself  an  evi- 
dence that  in  that  respect  he  had  "  become  like 
ELOHIM."  The  manner  in  which  man,  then,  looked 
upon  his  nudity,  when  "his  eyes  were  opened," 
was  the  way  in  which  ELOHIM  in  man's  position 
would  Himself  regard  it,  and  occasioned  his  acting 
with  respect  to  it,  precisely  as  ELOHIM  would,  and 
in  fact  did,  subsequently  act.  Now  had  man 
taken  this  new  view  of  his  nudity  in  consequence, 
and  as  a  part  of  his  changing  from  a  holy  to  a  sin- 
ful creature,  and  as  a  result  of  the  inroad  of  impure 
emotions,  then,  so  far  from  its  being  an  evidence 
of  his  having  become  more  like  ELOHIM,  it  would 
have  indicated  his  departure  from  such  a  resem- 
blance. In  such  case  its  cause  would  have  been 
described  as  the  advent  of  moral  darkness  and 
blindness,  instead  of  the  dawn  of  moral  light  and 


EFFECTS  OF  THE  FORBIDDEN  FRUIT.  135 

clearness  of  vision.  Hence,  the  passage,  while  it 
fully  accords  with  our  theory  that  verse  7  relates 
the  awakening  by  man  to  the  dignity  of  a  moral 
agent,  is  inconsistent  with  the  idea  that  it  repre- 
sents him,  theretofore  a  holy  moral  creature,  as 
falling  into  his  first  experience  of  sin. 

Having  thus  examined  the  transgression  with 
reference  to  its  immediate  results  upon  its  actors, 
let  us  consider  how  they  would  naturally  be  affected 
after  the  first  promptings  of  instinct  had  been 
obeyed,  and  some  little  time  had  elapsed  for  re- 
flection. While  busy  with  satisfying  the  instinc- 
tive demands  of  modesty,  they  could  think  of  noth- 
ing else ;  but  these  disposed  of,  their  minds  would 
naturally  revert  to  the  act  of  disobedience  which 
they  had  just  committed,  and  which  in  the  light  of 
their  newly  acquired  moral  sense  they  would  now 
begin  to  view  in  a  ne'sV  and  alarming  aspect.  It  is 
true  that  no  actual  sinfulness  had  as  yet,  in  fact, 
been  committed  by  the  pair,  (the  disobedience  hav- 
ing been  perpetrated  by  them  in  a  state  of  moral 
ignorance  ;)  nor  is  there  any  positive  intimation 
that  they  now  imputed  to  themselves  guilt  in  the 
transgression ;  yet  we  may  well  suppose  that  their 
sensitive  consciences  presented  their  conduct  to 
them,  however  incorrectly,  in  the  light  of  a  sin,  as 
they  can  hardly  be  supposed  to  have  reasoned  with 
much  metaphysical  precision  upon  the  effect  of 
their  previous  moral  incapacity.  Indeed,  some 
degree  of  morbidness  is  the  invariable  character- 


136  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

istic  of  a  newly  awakened  or  tender  conscience, 
even  in  the  most  cultivated  and  practised  minds. 
St.  Paul  could  not  refrain  from  calling  himself  the 
chief  of  sinners  when  reviewing  acts  in  which  at 
the  time  he  verily  thought  he  was  doing  God  ser- 
vice ;  and  such  examples  are  of  common  observa- 
tion. At  all  events,  whether  Adam  and  Eve  rea- 
soned or  not  upon  the  sinfulness  of  their  conduct, 
they  could  not  fail  to  remember  that  in  it  they  had 
disobeyed  the  positive  commands  of  their  Maker ; 
they  recalled  the  solemnly  declared  consequences, 
and  it  is  no  wonder  that,  when  they  heard  his  voice 
approaching,  "  they  hid  themselves  from  his  pres- 
ence among  the  trees  of  the  garden." 

"  And  the  Lord  God  called  unto  Adam,  and  said  unto  him, 
Where  art  thou  ?  And  he  said,  I  heard  thy  voice  in  the  gar- 
den, and  I  was  afraid,  because  I  was  naked ;  and  I  hid  myself. 
And  He  said,  Who  told  thee  that  thou  wast  naked  ?  Hast 
thou  eaten  of  the  tree  whereof  I  commanded  thee  that  thou 
shouldest  not  eat?  "  (Chap.  iii.  9-11.) 

Summoned  thus  from  their  retreat  to  render  an 
account  of  themselves,  Adam,  under  the  terror  of 
their  situation,  (and  here,  at  least,  the  temptation 
is  adequate,)  commits  his  first  sin,  —  that  of  equivo- 
cation, if  not  falsehood,  in  excusing  his  flight.  This 
excuse,  however,  is  not  without  its  bearing  upon 
our  inquiry.  Had  Adam  been  conscious  that  his 
sense  of  shame  proceeded  from  impure  emotions, 
he  would  scarcely  have  ventured  to  offer  it  as  an 
apology  for  his  self-concealment.  He  must  have 


EFFECTS  OF  THE  FORBIDDEN  FRUIT.     137 

supposed  it  in  itself  proper  and  commendable  ;  nor 
does  God  in  his  response  imply  the  contrary.  With- 
out any  censure  for  such  sentiments,  (which,  as  we 
have  seen,  He  afterward  fully  sanctioned,)  He  in- 
stantly demands,  in  an  inquiry  full  of  meaning  in 
this  connection,  "  Who  told  thee  that  thou  wast 
naked?  "  — a  plain  implication  of  man's  prior  want 
of  those  moral  perceptions  which  were  now  asso- 
ciated by  him  with  this  fact  of  nudity.  Whence 
comes  this  new  sentiment  of  modesty  ?  —  these 
sudden  perceptions  of  purity  and  impurity  ?  HAST 
THOU  EATEN  OF  THE  TREE  whose  power  it  was  to 
convey  them  ?  Is  it  from  that  that  thou  derivest 
this  new  knowledge  of  good  and  evil  ?  this  appre- 
hension of  moral  right  and  wrong  ?  Such  were 
the  questions  which  Adam  elicited  by  this  confes- 
sion of  his  modesty  ;  questions  whose  very  state- 
ment disclosed  their  answer,  and  would  seem  irre- 
sistibly to  confirm  the  conclusions  we  have  drawn 
from  other  portions  of  the  narrative. 

We  may  perhaps  incidentally  remark  that  this 
sin  of  equivocation  in  Adam,  was  one  not  so  hei- 
nous in  its  nature  (especially  in  view  of  his  situation 
at  the  moment)  as  to  be  unlikely  to  have  been  the 
first  committed  by  a  moral  being.  Indeed  it  is  the 
very  one  which  is  usually  the  first  serious  sin  of 
childhood,  —  falsehood  for  the  purpose  of  escaping 
apprehended  retribution  or  censure.1  We  thus 

1  "  Even  in  the  best  naturally  disposed  children  is  found  an  element 
of  hatred,  and  an  element  of  lying,  especially  for  the  purposes  of  self- 
justification." —  Miilhr's  Doctrine  of  Sin,  Vol.  II.  p.  309. 


188  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

avoid  a  serious  objection  (already  noticed)  to  the 
ordinary  view,  which  represents  the  first  sin  of 
Adam  as  one  of  the  greatest,  the  most  unaccount- 
able, the  least  excusable,  and  upon  the  smallest 
temptation  of  any  recorded  in  the  history  of  man. 


THE  SENTENCES  NOT  PUNISHMENTS.  139 


CHAPTER   VII. 

EXAMINATION  OF  THE   NARRATIVE   CONTINUED.     THE 
SENTENCES  NOT  PUNISHMENTS. 

THE  sentences  (so  called)  which  God  proceeds 
to  pass  upon  the  various  actors  in  the  disobedience 
now  demand  our  attention.  They  are  recorded  as 
follows :  — 

"  And  the  Lord  God  said  unto  the  serpent,  Because  thou 
hast  done  this,  thou  art  cursed  above  all  cattle,  and  above 
every  beast  of  the  field.  Upon  thy  belly  shalt  thou  go,  and 
dust  shalt  thou  eat  all  the  days  of  thy  life.  And  I  will  put 
enmity  between  thee  and  the  woman  and  between  thy  seed 
and  her  seed :  it  shall  bruise  thy  ,head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise 
his  heel. 

"  Unto  the  woman  he  said,  I  will  greatly  multiply  thy  sor- 
row and  thy  conception :  in  sorrow  shalt  thou  bring  forth 
children  ;  and  thy  desire  shall  be  unto  thy  husband,  and  he 
shall  rule  over  thee. 

"  And  unto  Adam  he  said,  Because  thou  hast  done  this, 
and  hast  hearkened  unto  the  voice  of  thy  wife,  and  hast  eaten 
of  the  tree  whereof  I  commanded  thee,  saying,  Thou  shalt 
not  eat  of  it ;  cursed  is  the  ground  for  thy  sake :  in  sorrow 
shalt  thou  eat  of  it,  all  the  days  of  thy  life  ;  thorns  also  and 
thistles  shall  it  bring  forth  to  thee,  and  thou  shalt  eat  of  the 
herb  of  the  field.  In  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt  thou  eat 
bread,  till  thou  return  unto  the  ground  ;  for  out  of  it  wast  thou 
taken ;  for  dust  thou  art,  and  unto  dust  shalt  thou  return." 
(Chap.  iii.  14-19.) 


140  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

Of  these,  that  which  is  addressed  to  the  serpent 
has  received  much  attentive  consideration  from 
commentators,  and  various  suppositions  have  been 
formed  regarding  it.  It  is  of  less  importance  in 
our  inquiry  than  the  others,  yet  not  destitute  of 
interest.  It  is  mostly  agreed  that  the  first  portion 
of  it  applies  merely  to  the  serpent  tribes  of  creat- 
ures, whose  shape,  having  been  thus  assumed  by  the 
tempter,  is  doomed  to  signify  thereafter  God's  dis- 
pleasure at  the  purpose  which  had  inspired  him  in 
this  transaction.  The  latter  part,  however,  is  gen- 
erally thought  to  be  prophetic,  and  to  foreshadow 
the  long  conflict  between  the  prince  of  darkness 
and  the  soul  of  man,  until  the  coming  of  Christ  to 
bruise  and  effectually  crush  the  power  of  evil  in 
the  world. 

If  we  adopt  this  interpretation  of  the  latter 
clause  of  the  address  to  the  serpent,  we  at  once  are 
led  to  inquire,  why,  upon  the  common  view  of  "  the 
fall,"  this  antagonism  between  man  and  the  prince 
of  evil  should  now  be  announced  as  a  thing  of  the 
future.  According  to  this  view,  man,  having  been 
previously  a  holy  being,  under  the  moral  law,  and 
with  the  power  of  breaking  it,  must  have  been 
always  subject  to  temptation  and  sin  ;  had  in  fact, 
been  at  this  time  already  attacked,  defeated,  and 
completely  ruined  by  the  enemy  of  his  soul.  In 
his  primal  fidelity  to  God,  and  preference  for  holi- 
ness, he  must  have  been  constantly  in  a  position  of 
antagonism  and  enmity  to  sin  and  the  tempter; 


THE  SENTENCES  NOT  PUNISHMENTS.          141 

more  so,  surely,  far  more  than  since  his  "fall," 
and  increased  depravity  of  nature.  Yet  the  Al- 
mighty distinctly  speaks,  not  of  continuing  enmity, 
but  of  '•'•putting  enmity"  between  him  and  the 
tempter,  as  a  thing  thenceforth  to  take  place.  "  I 
iv ill  put  enmity,"  etc.  It  would  appear  from  this 
that  no  such  antagonism  had  previously  subsisted 
between  man  and  sin  as  has  since  subsisted  ;  a  fact 
inconsistent  with  the  view  of  man's  original  moral 
holiness  and  subsequent  corruption,  but  clearly  in 
conformity  with  the  theory  that  his  moral  agency, 
and  consequently  "  the  enmity  "  between  him  and 
sin,  commenced  after  the  disobedience. 

In  this  address  to  the  serpent  we  recognize  a  just 
displeasure  on  the  part  of  the  Almighty  toward  an 
intelligent  and  malignant  being  who  has  designed 
to  subvert  God's  plans,  but  who,  with  the  usual 
success  of  such  plotters,  has  really  been  but  the 
blind  and  unwilling  instrument  of  accomplishing 
his  purposes.  In  influencing  man  to  disobedience, 
he  accomplished  no  real  triumph,  such  as  the  com- 
mon view  supposes,  either  over  man  or  his  Creator ; 
he  disappointed  no  wishes  or  intentions  of  God, 
even  temporarily ;  he  simply  occasioned  man's  ad- 
vancement to  the  condition  of  a  moral  agent,  and 
thus  furthered  God's  designs  respecting  human 
nature  from  the  beginning. 

The  sentences  pronounced  upon  the  human  pair 
we  shall  notice  more  at  length. 

In  the  first  place :  they  are  not  to  be  regarded  as 


142  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

the  denouncement  of  a  punishment.  For  it  is  mani- 
fest, that  if  a  punishment  is  proclaimed  by  them, 
it  must  be  either  a  punishment  for  this  specific  and 
individual  act  of  Adam  and  Eve,  or  a  punishment 
to  be  visited  upon  them  and  their  posterity  for  this 
and  future  transgressions  of  the  race.  That  it  is 
not  the  latter,  is  unequivocally  declared  by  God  in 
the  outset.  It  is,  "  Because  thou  hast  done  this, 
and  hast  hearkened  unto  the  voice  of  thy  wife,  and 
hast  eaten  of  the  fruit  of  the  tree  whereof  I  com- 
manded thee,  saying,  Thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it," 
that  the  results  announced  are  to  follow.  What- 
ever the  intent  or  purpose,  therefore,  of  these  fore- 
told experiences,  it  is  certain  that  they  were  to 
attach  to  Adam  and  his  posterity,  simply  and  solely 
as  a  consequence  of  this  particular  and  individual 
act  of  Adam  and  Eve.  Were  they,  then,  so  to  be 
visited  upon  Adam  and  all  future  generations  of 
mankind,  as  a  penalty  for  this  his  individual  act  of 
transgression  ?  We  shall  urge  the  negative  of  this 
proposition  upon  several  grounds  ;  and  in  doing  so, 
we  shall  of  course  set  aside  for  the  time  being  all 
our  previous  evidence  that  this  transgression  of 
Adam  was  not  a  sin,  and  consequently  offered  no 
cause  for  the  infliction  of  a  penalty.  We  shall 
proceed  upon  the  supposition  upheld  by  the  com- 
mon view,  that  it  was  a  criminal  act  in  him,  and  as 
such  a  proper  subject  for  punishment. 

The  first  objection,  then,  is  the  obvious  one  that 
as   these  foretold    experiences    are   evidently   an- 


THE  SENTENCES  NOT  PUNISHMENTS.          143 

nounced  as  conditions  which  were  to  attach  to  the 
whole  race  forever,  they  could  not  be  intended  as  a 
punishment  for  Adam's  individual  act.  Had  Adam 
committed  a  sin  punishable  with  death,  it  were  not 
mercy  merely,  it  were  the  simplest  justice,  to  visit 
the  penalty  upon  him  and  new-create  the  race.  It 
were  the  most  obvious  wrong  to  punish  Adam's 
posterity  for  the  guilt  of  his  first  sin  any  more  than 
for  that  of  his  second ;  or  to  punish  his  descend- 
ants for  his  sins  any  more  than  for  the  sins  of  any 
subsequent  ancestor.  By  this,  we  of  course  do  not 
mean  to  deny  either  the  fact  or  the  justice  of 
God's  "  visiting  the  iniquities  of  the  fathers  upon 
the  children  unto  the  third  and  fourth  generation," 
as  he  declares  he  does  in  another  place.  It  is,  as 
we  conceive,  a  very  different  thing  to  "  visit  the 
iniquities  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children"  in  the 
natural  and  legitimate  consequences  which  evil 
deeds  may  entail  upon  an  innocent  posterity,  from 
what  it  is  "  to  punish "  the  children  for  the  sins 
of  their  fathers,  by  the  infliction  of  special  penalties 
totally  separate  and  disconnected  from  the  conse- 
quences of  such  sins.  Such  are  the  trials  here  pre- 
dicted for  the  descendants  of  the  human  pair :  the 
pangs  of  childbirth,  the  sterility  of  the  ground,  the 
necessity  and  fatigues  of  toil.  These  are  conse- 
quences specially  imposed  for  the  act  of  disobe- 
dience, and  which  did  not  naturally  grow  out  of 
it.  Even  mortality  itself,  as  we  have  before  seen, 
appears  not  to  have  been  a  necessary  or  natural 


144  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

result  of  the  disobedience  ;  for  from  ver.se  22  it  would 
appear  that  it  was  already  man's  natural  condition  ; 
that  it  could  have  been  averted  before  the  trans- 
gression only  by  partaking  of  the  "  tree  of  life," 
and  that  it  might  have  been  averted  by  so  doing, 
even  after  that  event.  If  then  the  permitting  it  to 
continue,  by  depriving  man  of  any  farther  oppor- 
tunity of  escaping  it,  was  indeed  a  penalty,  it  was 
a  penalty  special  and  not  naturally  consequent  in  its 
character.  This  consideration  is  of  itself  an  evi- 
dence that  it  could  not  have  been  intended  as  a 
penalty  for  the  disobedience  ;  for  such  are  not  the 
punishments  of  sin  which  God  allows  to  descend 
upon  even  the  third  and  fourth  generations,  far  less 
upon  all  generations  forever. 

Second.  Another  indication  that  a  penalty  is 
not  here  imposed,  may  be  found  in  the  phraseology 
of  the  sentence  itself.  According  to  the  ordinary 
doctrine,  a  curse  was  passed  at  this  time  upon 
Adam  and  his  race.  "  All  mankind  fell  under 
God's  wrath  and  curse,"  says  the  "Westminster 
Catechism ;  but  it  will  be  observed  that  no  such 
curse  upon  the  human  family  is  here  narrated.  It 
is  not  Adam,  but  the  ground,  that  is  cursed.  The 
difference  between  the  address  to  Adam  and  that  to 
the  serpent  is  remarkable.  Both  commence  in  the 
same  manner,  —  "Because  thou  hast  done  this;" 
but  with  the  serpent  it  is,  "  cursed  art  th-ou"  while 
with  Adam  it  is  simply,  "  cursed  is  the  ground,  for 
thy  sake  !  "  Nor  is  this  only  another  form  for  the 


THE  SENTENCES  NOT  PUNISHMENTS.         145 

same  thing,  a.s  we  shall  see  if  we  compare  it  with 
God's  terrible  denunciation  upon  Cain,  in  the  next 
chapter : — 

"And  now  thou  art  cursed  from  the  earth,  [or,  in  respect 
to  the  earth,]  which  hath  opened  her  mouth  to  receive  thy 
brother's  blood  from  thy  hand.  When  thou  tillest  the  ground, 
it  shall  not  henceforth  yield  unto  thee  her  strength,"  etc. 
(Chap.  i-v.  11.) 

So  also  in  the  28th  chapter  of  Deuteronomy, 
where  curses  are  denounced  upon  the  Israelites  if 
they  should  be  disobedient.  It  is  done  in  no  indi- 
rect manner :  — 

"  Cursed  shalt  thou  be  in  the  city,  and  cursed  shalt  thou  be 
in  the  field.  Cursed  shalt  thou  be  when  thou  comest  in,  and 
cursed  shalt  thou  be  when  thou  goest  out." 

In  the  case  before  us,  the  announcement  of  "  the 
sentence  "  is  not  in  a  form  that  necessarily  indi- 
cates anger,  especially  that  portion  which  is  ad- 
dressed to  Eve.  Even  mortality  —  as  we  have 
observed  in  another  place  —  seems  foretold  simply 
as  man's  natural  fate ;  a  fate  not  specially  prepared 
for  him  on  account  of  the  transgression,  but  only 
not  to  be  averted,  as  it  might  perhaps  otherwise  have 
been.  Such  appears  to  be  the  force  of  the  expres- 
sion which  is  literally  translated,  "  until  thy  return- 
ing unto  the  dust,  whence  thou  art  taken ;  for  dust 
thou  art,  and  unto  dust  shalt  thou  return ; "  and 
this  inference  is  confirmed  by  the  allusions  in  other 
parts  of  the  story  to  the  "  tree  of  life,"  and  to  the 
necessity  that  man,  whether  before  or  after  the 
10 


146         THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

transgression,  should  partake  of  it,  in  order  to  be 
rendered  immortal. 

Third.  The  experiences  here  predicted  cannot 
be  understood  as  penalties  imposed  for  the  disobe- 
dience, because  (with  the  exception  of  mortality) 
they  had  not  been  forewarned  or  threatened  as  its 
consequences.  God  could  not  with  justice,  any 
more  than  human  rulers,  inflict  upon  man  punish- 
ments of  which  he  had  not  forewarned  him;  and 
if  death  alone  had  been  announced  as  the  penalty, 
he  could  not  now  inflict  different  and  additional  evils 
such  as  were  not  necessarily  involved  in  mortality. 
That  the  trials  here  recited  were  not  so  involved, 
appears  from  the  fact  that  God  distinctly  tells  Eve, 
that  her  increased  physical  "  sorrows,"  and  those 
of  her  sex,  were  to  be  an  effect  specially  imposed, — 
"  I  will  greatly  multiply  thy  sorrow,"  etc.  The 
sterility  of  the  ground,  too,  is  the  consequence  of  a 
distinct  and  separate  curse  upon  it,  entirely  inde- 
pendent of  man's  mortality.  But  this  is  not  all. 
The  objection  may  be  as  fairly  taken  from  what  is 
omitted  in  the  enumeration,  as  from  what  is  con- 
tained. Whether  this  "  sentence  "  be  supposed  to 
be  an  infliction  for  this  particular  sin  of  Adam 
alone,  or  whether  a  general  judgment  for  the  future 
sinfulness  of  mankind  foreshadowed  and  typified  in 
this  first  transgression,  in  either  case  it  is  unac- 
countably incomplete.  For,  what  are  undoubtedly 
the  worst  penalties  of  sin  are  not  here  alluded  to. 
Nothing  is  said  of  the  diseases,  the  violence,  the 


THE  SENTENCES  NOT  PUNISHMENTS.     147 

distresses,  the  injustice,  the  alarms,  the  remorse,  and 
all  the  other  direct  punishments  of  sin  in  this  life ; 
nothing  of  its  retribution  in  another  state  of  exist- 
ence. Will  it  be  claimed  that  God  not  only  openly 
affixed  unexpected  additions  to  the  penalty  originally 
forewarned,  but  even  in  announcing  these  mentally 
added  others,  the  greatest,  most  important,  and 
most  fearful  of  all  ?  Clearly,  if  an  announcement 
of  the  penalty  for  sin,  this  "  sentence,"  while  it  is 
in  one  point  of  view  unjustly  enlarged,  is  in  another 
as  strangely  deficient. 

And  fourth :  not  only  do  these  sentences  include 
too  much,  and  omit  too  much,  to  be  regarded  as  the 
denouncement  of  penalties  for  sin,  but,  what  is  a  still 
more  forcible  objection,  the  evils  which  they  do  fore- 
tell are  such  as  do  not  ensue  to  all  sinners.  If  we 
allow  that  they  proclaim  judgments  for  general  sin- 
fulness,  (though  but  an  incomplete  enumeration,) 
they  at  least  ought  to  be  as  universal  in  their  appli- 
cation to  the  race,  as  the  sinfulness  against  which 
they  are  meant  to  testify  God's  displeasure.  But  it 
will  be  seen  that  the  sorrows  predicted  for  Eve,  are 
such  as  visit  only  those  of  her  female  descendants 
who  bear  children ;  and  the  burdens  (if  any)  that 
are  placed  upon  Adam,  are,  as  we  know,  entirely 
unfelt  by  a  large  proportion  of  his  posterity.  Mil- 
lions upon  millions  of  women  have  lived  and  died 
without  experiencing  the  peculiar  trials  of  the  wife 
and  the  mother ;  and  other  vast  multitudes  of  the 
race,  in  all  ages,  have  been  relieved  by  Nature's 


148  THE  RISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

profusion  in  tropical  climes,  the  fertility  of  partic- 
ular soils,  the  possession  of  hereditary  property,  or 
by  other  circumstances,  from  the  necessity  of  toil 
for  a  subsistence.  These  prescribed  experiences, 
then,  if  they  are  designed  to  be  penalties  for  sin, 
differ  very  widely  —  differ,  indeed,  in  the  most  es- 
sential point  —  from  the  real  and  admitted  retribu- 
tions for  guilty  deeds,  —  remorse,  fear,  mental  and 
physical  ruin  and  suffering,  which  no  sinner  ever 
escapes,  of  whatever  sex,  condition,  or  country.  It 
cannot  be  believed  that  experiences,  so  uncertain 
and  so  imperfectly  encountered  by  mankind,  should 
have  been  selected  by  the  Deity  as  general  penalties 
for  a  guilty  race,  —  and  so  held  up  as  a  special 
and  peculiar  testimonial  of  his  displeasure  at  man's 
universal  sinfulness. 

These  considerations  alone,  and  certainly  these 
in  connection  with  the  evidence  adduced  that  the 
transgression  was  not  a  sinful  act  in  Adam  and  Eve, 
must  suffice  to  convince  us  that  the  conditions  of 
life  here  imposed  upon  all  generations  of  mankind 
forever,  were  not  thus  imposed  as  a  penalty  for  the 
personal  disobedience  of  their  progenitors. 

But  if  these  experiences  thus  announced  to  en- 
sue upon  the  disobedience  are  not  penalties  for  it, 
in  what  light  are  they  to  be  regarded  ?  They  are 
certainly  not  rewards,  and  if  neither  rewards  nor 
punishments,  what  is  their  character  ?  The  question 
is  most  pertinent,  yet  not  difficult  of  answer.  They 
are,  manifestly,  certain  new  conditions  of  existence 


THE  SENTENCES  NOT  PUNISHMENTS.  149 

now  imposed  upon  man,  as  those  into  which  Infi- 
nite Wisdom  and  Benevolence  see  it  best  that  he, 
as  a  moral  agent,  shall  enter ;  conditions  which, 
though  involving  some  sorrows,  and  entailing  some 
burdens,  are  yet  with  wonderful  wisdom  adapted  to 
his  necessities  in  his  exalted  yet  hazardous  state  of 
moral  agency,  in  order  to  enable  him  to  escape  its 
perils,  to  partake  fully  of  its  blessings,  and  to  reach, 
through  it,  the  highest  development  of  his  being. 
This  supposition  reconciles  all  the  difficulties  which 
we  have  considered,  and  which  present  such  insu- 
perable objections  to  any  other  view  of  this  narra- 
tive. These  conditions  of  life  were,  indeed,  as  pro- 
claimed by  the  Creator,,  to  be  entered  into  by  Adam 
and  his  posterity,  "  because  "  he  committed  the  act 
of  disobedience  ;  yet  they  are  not  open  to  the  charge 
of  injustice  that  would  lie  against  them,  were  they 
a  punishment  for  that,  his  individual  act.  They 
were  not  aggravations  of  the  troubles  incident  to 
humanity,  but  a  means  adopted  to  mitigate  or  pre- 
vent the  evils  to  which  it  would  otherwise  be  ex- 
posed. To  have  created  subsequent  generations 
into  a  state  of  punishment  for  acts  committed  before 
they  were  born,  would  have  been  an  injustice,  how- 
ever slight  that  punishment  might  be  ;  but  to  create 
them  into  any  particular  conditions  of  life,  not  suf- 
ficiently onerous  to  make  existence,  on  the  whole,  a 
burden  and  an  evil,  (especially  if  the  purpose  and 
tendency  of  those  conditions  were  to  promote  their 
happiness  or  elevation,)  would  be  no  more  unjust 


150  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

than  to  create  them  into  any  particular  age  or  coun- 
try. That  the  conditions  under  consideration  were 
of  such  character  and  tendency,  that  they  were  not 
only  no  serious  calamity  to  man,  but  actually  calcu- 
lated and  intended  to  secure  his  physical,  moral, 
and  spiritual  welfare,  we  shall  now  proceed  to  show. 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  151 


CHAPTER 
THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE. 

IT  is  plain  that  in  the  new  relations  of  man, 
wherein  the  irregularities  and  excesses  of  his  pas- 
sions, otherwise  merely  pernicious,  had  become 
guilty  and  punishable,  it  would  comport  with  the 
goodness  and  benevolence  of  God  to  place  him  in 
such  circumstances  of  life  as  would  cooperate  with 
reason  and  conscience  to  regulate  his  appetites,  and 
to  restrain  their  strength  and  growth.  Accordingly, 
we  find  that  all  the  conditions  of  life  now  announced 
by  his  Maker,  as  henceforth  imposed  upon  him,  are 
such  as  experience  has  shown  to  be  conspicuously 
of  that  character. 

The  "  sentence  "  (if  we  may  so  call  it)  of  Eve, 
which  is  first  in  order,  peculiarly  sustains  this  state- 
ment, and  is  manifestly  designed  for  purposes  of 
the  highest  importance  to  the  moral  welfare  of  the 
race :  — 

"  I  will  greatly  multiply  thy  sorrow  and  thy  conception  :  in 
sorrow  thou  shalt  bring  forth  children ;  and  thy  desire  shall 
be  to  thy  husband,  and  he  shall  rule  over  thee." 

A  most  remarkable  and  impressive  announce- 
ment !  One  that  must  have  strangely  affected  the 
trembling  Eve,  if  she  were  expecting  from  her 


152  THE  RISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

Creator's  lips,  the  threatened  doom  of  death,  and 
with  it  the  annihilation  of  the  human  race !  In 
exact  and  widest  contrariety  to  the  purport  of  such 
a  sentence,  is  this  announcement  of  her  own  con- 
tinued existence,  and  through  her  the  birth  and 
generation  of  Earth's  future  millions  through  count- 
less ages.  This  Divine  address,  so  extraordinary  in 
all  its  aspects,  and  especially  when  viewed  in  con- 
nection with  the  preceding  parts  of  the  narrative, 
will  well  repay  the  most  careful  study. 

And  first,  to  express  the  considerations  which  the 
passage  suggests  most  obviously  to  the  mind. 

The  conditions  of  life  that  are  announced  as 
henceforth  imposed  upon  woman  are  the  trials  of 
parturition,  and  especially  her  subjection  to  the  jeal- 
ous watchfulness  and  authority  of  the  stronger  sex, 
—  a  jealousy  instinctive  in  its  character,  and  pecul- 
iar to  the  human  race,  —  a  jealousy  which  estab- 
lishes chastity  as  the  first  female  virtue,  and  punishes 
the  loss  of  it,  as  woman's  worst  sin,  with  inexorable 
rigor,  and  with  lasting  disgrace,  —  which  especially 
enforces  her  fidelity  to  the  conjugal  relation  as  the 
right  and  due  of  her  husband  scarcely  less  than  of 
God,  and  regards  her  violation  of  this  duty  as  the 
most  flagrant  crime,  and  the  deepest  wrong  that  she 
can  possibly  commit,  —  a  crime  never  to  be  for- 
gotten or  forgiven.  Who  will  deny  that  these 
have  been,  in  all  ages,  among  the  strongest  pre- 
servatives of  female  virtue  ?  The  fact  is  remark- 
able that  in  all  ages  and  countries,  and  in  every 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  153 

form  of  society,  from  the  most  barbarous  to  the 
most  enlightened  and  Christian,  the  purity  of 
woman  has  been  viewed  by  the  natural  instinct  of 
both  sexes  in  a  light  far  different  from  the  same 
virtue  in  man.  By  the  common  law  of  mankind, 
there  is  recognized  in  him  a  sort  of  right  or  property 
in  her  character,  imposing  upon  her  a  special  law, 
and  a  double  obligation  to  chastity,  notwithstanding 
that,  theoretically,  the  rules  of  morality  know  no 
distinctions  of  sex.  This  instinct  it  is,  and  the  con- 
sequences that  flow  from  it  in  the  social  penalties 
that  follow  her  loss  of  virtue,  together  with  the 
physical  trials  to  which  she  must  be  subjected  in 
childbirth,  which  have  been  ever  among  the  great- 
est blessings  of  woman  and  the  world.  They  have 
operated  to  check  the  prevalence  of  licentiousness 
in  Earth's  worst  regions  and  periods,  and  have  effi- 
ciently aided  to  preserve  the  vigor  of  the  human 
race.  Are  ordinances  of  such  wisdom  and  good- 
ness to  be  regarded  as  a  curse  and  a  punishment  ? 
Are  they  to  be  mourned  over  as  a  penalty  for  sin, 
or  rather  to  be  rejoiced  at  as  means  preventive  or 
obstructive  of  its  sway  ? 

That  all  this  is  involved  in  the  "  sentence  "  of 
Eve,  is  apparent  upon  a  merely  general  considera- 
tion. But  if  we  will  examine  the  constituent  parts 
of  the  "  sentence,"  we  shall  see  reasons,  more  defi- 
nite and  not  less  powerful,  for  recognizing  it  as  a 
wise  and  benevolent  provision  for  a  race  of  beings 
about  entering  on  a  moral  existence.  It  speaks 


154  THE  RISE  AND   THE   FALL. 

first  of  a  change  to  occur  in  the  physical  nature  of 
woman ;  and  second,  of  new  relations  and  obliga- 
tions of  a  moral  character,  to  which  she  is  thence- 
forth to  be  subject.  Let  us  take  the  first  portion 
first :  "  I  will  greatly  multiply  thy  sorrow  and  con- 
ception :  in  sorrow  shalt  thou  bring  forth  children  !  " 
It  is  clear  that  some  degree  of  pain  in  childbirth 
was  to  have  been  her  lot,  even  in  her  original  state, 
corresponding,  in  this  respect,  with  the  higher  or- 
ders of  animals,  which  suffer  more  or  less  of  physi- 
cal pain  in  producing  their  young.  This  inconsid- 
erable "  sorrow  "  is  now  to  be  greatly  augmented, 
and  if  we  would  appreciate  the  effects  of  such  aug- 
mentation upon  the  physical  and  moral  welfare  of 
the  race,  let  us  reflect  how  widely  the  relationships 
of  parent  and  child,  of  brother  and  sister, —  in  short, 
the  family  relation,  —  differ  in  all  their  characteristics 
and  influences  among  mankind,  from  the  same  rela- 
tionships among  the  brute  creation.  Nor  is  it  diffi- 
cult to  see  how  far  this  difference  is  effected  by  the 
increased  "  sorrow,"  the  pains,  anxieties,  and  labors, 
which  the  human  mother  experiences  in  producing 
and  rearing  her  offspring.  The  lower  animal,  bring- 
ing forth  its  young  with  little  or  no  physical  exertion 
or  strain,  and  providing  for  their  infant  wants  with- 
out labor,  needs  no  natural  limitation  to  the  num- 
ber of  her  family.  Each  infant,  or  brood,  that  is 
produced,  has  passed  the  need  of  maternal  assistance 
before  the  next  comes  forth,  and  is  thenceforth  for- 
ever abandoned  and  forgotten.  Such,  it  would  ap- 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  156 

pear,  would  have  been  substantially  the  condition 
and  relations  of  the  human  mother  and  her  children 
but  for  this  "  greatly  multiplied  sorrow,"  imposed 
upon  Eve  and  her  daughters, —  by  which  we  under- 
stand, in  accordance  with  most  commentators,  not 
merely  the  physical  pains  of  parturition,  but  all  the 
maternal  cares  and  labors  necessarily  incurred,  from 
physical  causes,  in  producing  and  rearing  infants. 
These  pains,  cares,  and  labors,  inevitably  restrain 
the  mother  from  having  more  children  than  she  can 
faithfully  attend  to  both  physically  and  morally, 
and  keep  them  under  her  care  and  influence  while 
their  characters  are  forming  for  life.  The  family  is 
thus  consolidated  and  inseparably  united.  It  is  kept 
together  by  natural  causes,  long  enough  to  make  its 
mutual  attachments  and  associations  ineffaceable, 
and  the  strongest  of  human  sentiments.  A  com- 
pact organization  of  intelligent  creatures,  compelled 
to  associate,  it  would  be  impossible  for  it  to  sub- 
sist, except  in  the  mutual  observance  by  its  mem- 
bers of  those  moral  laws  and  principles,  which 
alone  can  secure  its  harmony  and  happiness  ;  and 
its  training  in  those  laws  and  principles,  the  form  of 
its  organization,  and  all  its  natural  ties,  sympathies, 
and  influences,  are  most  happily  fitted  to  promote. 
Here  the  mind  is  trained,  from  the  earliest  hour,  in 
ideas  of  obedience,  truth,  and  mutual  dependence,  and 
in  sentiments  of  affection,  forbearance,  and  forgive- 
ness, besides  the  manifold  other  virtues  and  graces 
which,  implanted  and  cherished  in  the  family  circle, 


156  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

bloom  and  bear  fruit  afterwards  in  wider  spheres,  to 
the  admiration,  instruction,  and  improvement  of 
mankind.  We  need  not  dwell  upon  a  theme  so 
often  treated  as  the  important  influence  of  the  fam- 
ily relation  upon  the  moral  welfare  of  the  human 
race.  That  influence  is  well  understood,  and  uni- 
versally admitted  to  be  greater  than  all  others 
combined ;  —  and  yet,  it  would  seem  (if  indeed  this 
"  sentence  "  of  Eve  announced  an  important  change 
in  the  conditions  under  which  her  descendants  were 
to  be  born  and  reared  through  infancy)  that,  but  for 
that  "  sentence,"  the  power  of  the  family  relation 
among  men  would  have  been  imperfect  or  unknown. 
Why  children  might  suitably  be  easily  borne,  and 
cast  upon  the  world  at  a  tender  age,  abundantly 
able  to  provide  for  themselves,  if,  like  animals,  they 
were  not  destined  to  a  moral  career,  can  easily  be 
understood  ;  and  why,  as  moral  beings,  they  require 
the  different  conditions  of  birth  and  training  implied 
in  the  "  sentence  "  under  consideration,  seems  also 
abundantly  manifest. 

Before  leaving  this  part  of  Eve's  sentence,  we 
may  allude  to  a  subordinate  effect  often  attributed  to 
the  maternal  sufferings  and  cares  therein  imposed, — 
an  increased  affection  toward  the  offspring  that 
causes  them.  It  is  difficult  to  decide  how  far  the 
intensity  of  maternal  affection  is  due  to  this  mere 
endurance  of  pain  and  care,  as  distinguished  from 
other  and  powerful  causes ;  but  there  are  many  rea- 
sons for  believing  that  it  has  an  important  influence. 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  157 

Why  else  is  the  mother's  love  for  her  offspring 
deeper  and  stronger  than  the  father's,  who  asso- 
ciates as  constantly  with  them,  but  has  less  of  the 
trials  and  burdens  of  their  nurture  ?  Why,  among 
barbarians  and  savages,  who,  approximating  in  their 
habits  of  life  to  the  level  of  the  animal  creation, 
bring  forth  and  rear  their  children  with  scarcely 
more  pain  and  trouble  than  the  brutes,  are  parental 
affection  and  all  family  ties  so  little  regarded  ?  In- 
deed, when  we  observe,  what  seems  to  be  a  general 
fact,  that  the  amount  of  physical  pain  and  trial 
attendant  upon  infant  birth  and  nurture  bears  a 
direct  proportion  to  the  moral  and  social  advance- 
ment of  the  class  or  community  to  which  the  mother 
belongs,  —  it  would  almost  seem  as  if  it  were  provi- 
dentially proportioned  to  the  mother's  knowledge 
of  her  moral  duties,  and  the  moral  dangers  of  her 
children  ;  —  and  designed,  by  intensifying  the  ma- 
ternal affection  and  solicitude,  to  increase  her  moral 
care,  and  to  strengthen  the  family  influence  in  those 
forms  of  society  where  the  most  varied  enticements 
to  sin  prevail,  and  the  strongest  natural  protection 
against  them  is  required. 

Let  us  now  take  up  the  second  clause  of  Eve's 
sentence  :  —  "  Thy  desire  shall  be  unto  thy  hus- 
band, and  he  shall  rule  over  thee."  The  original 
for  "  desire "  is  TERSHUKAH,  and  is  defined  by 
Gesenius,  (Robinson's  edition,  1850,)  "  to  run ;  " 
hence,  (with  citation  of  this  passage,)  "  to  run 
after,"  "  to  desire,"  "  to  long  for."  The  same  word 


158         THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

occurs  in  Genesis  iv.  7,  where  God,  speaking  to 
Cain  of  sin,  which,  like  a  wild  beast,  "  lieth  at  the 
door,"  says,  "unto  thee  shall  be  his  desire,  (i.  e., 
he  shall  long  after,  or  to  have  possession  of  thee,) 
and  thou  shalt  (i.  e.,  it  is  thy  duty  to)  rule  over  (or 
control)  him."  The  word  expresses  any  passionate 
longing  or  desire,  and  may  be  used  to  express  sex- 
ual passion,  longing,  or  inclination.  Thus  it  is  em- 
ployed in  Solomon's  Song,  (ch.  vii.  10,)  where,  in 
the  midst  of  an  exceedingly  amatory  strain,  com- 
mencing, — "  How  fair  and  pleasant  art  thou,  O 
love,  for  delights !  "  —  the  joyous  exclamation  of  the 
loved  one  breaks  forth,  —  "I  am  my  beloved's,  and 
his  desire  is  toward  me !  "  And  in  the  passage 
under  consideration,  the  whole  context  seems  clearly 
to  indicate  its  use  in  a  similar  sense.1 

But  farther ;  the  original  for  "  husband  "  (ISH), 
though  also  signifying,  generically,  "  man,"  has,  in 
this  place,  the  limited  signification  of  its  English 
rendering.  This  will  appear  not  only  from  the  text 
itself,  but  also  from  a  comparison  with  ch.  ii.  24, 
where  Adam  speaks  of  (ISH)  "  a  man  "  leaving 
father  and  mother,  and  cleaving  unto  his  (ISHA) 
"  woman,"  in  which  case  it  is  plain  that  he  does  not 
speak  of  "  man  "  in  general,  nor  of  "  woman  "  in 
general,  but  of  an  associated  human  pair.  So  in 
the  passage  under  review,  "  thy  desire  shall  be  unto 

1  The  phrase  is  rendered  in  the  Septuagint,  irpbs  ™v  avSpa  <rov  jj  airo<r- 
TpoQij  <rov ;  and  the  Latin  translation  of  the  Targum  of  Onkelos,  in  Wal- 
ton's Polyglot  Bible,  gives  it, —  "Ad  virum  tuum  dtsiderium  luum," 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  159 

thy  (ISH)  man"  plainly  means,  "the  man  with 
whom  thou  art  mated, — thy  husband;  and  Tie 
(i.  e.,  such  man,  thy  husband)  shall  rule  over  thee." 
Now,  what  is  remarkable  here  is,  that  in  this  pas- 
sage we  find  thus,  for  the  first  time  laid  down,  the 
moral  duties  of  the  marriage  relation.  It  is  no  gen- 
eral statement  that  "  woman  "  shall  have  affection 
and  "  desire  "  towards  "  man,"  and  that  "  man  " 
shall  exercise  government  over  "woman";  but  it  is, 
that  the  "  desire"  of  the  wife  shall  be  confined  to  her 
husband,  and  that  in  their  married  relation  she  shall 
render  to  her  husband  obedience.  It  imposes  con- 
jugal fidelity  and  conjugal  submission,  —  to  "love, 
honor,  and  obey," — the  whole  moral  law  of  marriage. 
It  is  the  first  Divine  injunction  given,  that  there 
should  subsist  between  a  human  pair  a  more  sacred 
and  exclusive  relationship  to  each  other,  as  a  moral 
obligation,  than  prevails  in  the  similar  natural  asso- 
ciations of  birds  or  beasts.  Like  the  other  conditions 
of  life  recited  in  "  the  sentence,"  it  is  established 
thenceforth  :  a  plain  implication  that  Adam  and  Eve, 
though  called  in  one  or  two  instances  "  man  and 
wife,"  as  our  translation  renders  the  expressions 
ISH  and  ISHA,  ("  man "  and  "  woman,")  in  the 
preceding  portions  of  the  narrative,  had  not,  up  to 
this  time,  been  under  the  moral  laws  and  relations 
which  were  thereafter  to  be  conveyed  by  those  des- 
ignations. Nor  does  this  involve  anything  deroga- 
tory ;  for  in  their  peculiar  circumstances,  (even  had 
they  possessed  a  moral  sense,)  such  a  fact  could  be 


160  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

a  matter  of  no  importance.  Being  entirely  alone 
in  the  world,  there  was  no  room  for  conjugal  jeal- 
ousy or  infidelity.  The  word  "  helpmeet,"  a  title 
applied  to  Eve  in  the  preceding  chapter,  seems  to 
express  more  accurately  than  "  wife,"  her  relations 
toward  Adam  before  the  disobedience. 

The  whole  account  of  Eve's  creation  and  pres- 
entation to  Adam  is  most  curious  and  significant,  — 
well  worthy  our  study.  It  has  been  customary  to 
say  that  the  marriage  relation  was  instituted  at  that 
time,  and  this  is  true,  so  far  as  regards  the  pairing 
or  association  of  the  sexes  in  human  creatures  ;  but 
there  is  no  proof  that  the  narrative  goes  farther 
than  this,  as  we  shall  see  upon  a  closer  examination. 
As  preliminary  to  this  examination,  however,  a  few 
remarks  seem  desirable. 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  date  or  origin  of 
this  history  in  its  present  form,  there  can  be  little 
doubt  that  the  original  traditions  or  memoranda 
from  which  it  is  derived  were  among  the  oldest 
known  literature.  They  date  back  to  a  period  long 
preceding  Moses,  and  anterior  even  to  the  most 
ancient  Egyptian  inscriptions.  The  language  em- 
ployed in  them,  and  at  least  partially  preserved  in 
this  narrative,  was  of  the  most  archaic  and  primi- 
tive character  ;  so  simple,  that  its  words,  few  and 
typical,  are  still  invested  with  the  purely  physical 
ideas  in  which  they  originated.  Among  them,  we 
seem  back  at  the  very  creation  of  language.  We 
recognize  the  few,  original  and  long-forgotten  ances- 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  161 

tors  of  those  whole  classes  of  kindred  words,  which 
now  represent,  in  their  respective  families,  so  many 
varied  shades  of  meaning.  We  behold  these  primi- 
tive ancestral  types  just  expanding  themselves  from 
the  primary  materialism  which  gave  them  birth,  and 
beginning  to  reach  after  higher  meanings,  like  Mil- 
ton's half-formed  brutes  emerging  from  the  ground, 
and  struggling  to  be  free.  From  this  simplicity  and 
poverty  of  terms,  it  results  that  the  same  word  will 
stand  for  a  whole  family  of  similar  or  derivative  sig- 
nifications, and  it  will  be  left  to  the  reader  to  infer 
the  sense  which  the  writer  intended  to  convey,  — 
a  matter  not  always  devoid  of  doubt,  or  incapable 
of  leaving  room  for  dispute  by  different  readers. 
Thus  the  word  ADAM,  originally  meaning  "  red," 
or  "  red  earth,"  appears  throughout  the  story  as  a 
word  used  for  "  the  ground,"  for  the  common  noun 
"the  man,"  and  for  the  proper  name  "Adam"; 
the  original  often  affording  no  means  of  distin- 
guishing the  sense  intended,  except  as  the  require- 
ments of  the  context  furnish  it.  Accordingly,  an 
examination  will  show  that  there  exists  no  suffi- 
cient reason  whatever  for  interpreting  it,  at  least,  in 
this  part  of  the  story,  as  a  proper  name.  It  does  not 
appear  ever  to  have  been  applied  as  such  to  "  the 
man  "  by  his  Maker.  It  is  uniformly  translated 
"  the  man  "  down  to  ch.  ii.  v.  19,  where  the  trans- 
lator suddenly  changes  to  "Adam,"  without  any 
apparent  reason,  and  uses  "  Adam  "  and  "  the  man  " 
indiscriminately  thereafter.  So,  of  the  words  ISH 
11 


162        THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

and  ISHA,  translated  "  man  "  and  "  woman  "  in  v. 
24.  Their  original  meaning  is  simply  "  male  "  and 
"  female,"  being  words  of  sex  applicable  to  all  ani- 
mals and  creatures.  Thus,  in  Genesis  vii.  2,  3, 
God  commands  Noah,  "  Of  every  clean  beast  thou 
shalt  take  to  thee,  by  sevens,  the  male  (ISH)  and 
his  female  (ISHA),  and  of  fowls  also,  the  male 
(ISH)  and  his  female  (ISHA)."  These  same 
words  then  we  shall  find  rendered  by  the  trans- 
lators of*  this  narrative,  at  their  option,  "  male  " 
and  "  female,"  "  man  "  and  "  woman,"  or  "  hus- 
band "  and  "  wife,"  —  and  even  diversely  interpreted 
within  the  same  sentence.  Thus,  in  v.  24,  our  ver- 
sion reads  :  "  Therefore  shall  a  man  (ISH)  leave 
his  father  and  his  mother,  and  cleave  unto  his  wife 
(ISHA),"  where  there  is  no  more  reason  for  not 
translating  ISHA  "  woman,"  than  there  is  for  trans- 
lating ISH  "  man  "  ;  our  sense  of  the  word  "  wife  " 
being  no  more  necessarily  implied  than  it  is  in 
Genesis  vii.  2,  just  quoted,  and  where  it  is  prop- 
erly translated  "  female."  1 

This  primitive  physical  origin  of  terms,  however, 
is  in  no  instance  more  marked  than  in  that  expres- 
sion which,  in  v.  18,  20,  is  translated  "  helpmeet." 
This  phrase  ETZEB,  K'  NEGDO,  [translated  in  the 
Septuagint  /Jo^os  O/AOIOS  avno,  "  a  helper  counter- 


1  So  it  is  said,  that  among  the  Zulus  of  South  Africa,  who  are  among 
the  lowest  of  the  human  race  in  the  moral  scale,  "  No  word  correspond- 
ing to  the  Saxon  word  wife  is  found  in  the  Zulu  language.  The  terms 
most  nearly  approaching  to  it  are  '  umkake,'  and  its  correlatives  umkako 
and  umkami,  which  mean  '  his  she,'  or  '  his  female.1  " 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  163 

part  to  him,"]  exhibits,  in  its  primary  meaning, 
a  coarseness  of  physical  idea  which  cannot  be 
shown  in  a  work  of  this  kind,  but  of  which  our 
English  word  "  helpmeet "  (at  least  in  its  modern 
acceptation,  implying  social  companionship  and  as- 
sistance in  the  duties  and  cares  of  life)  is  quite  too 
elevated  and  refined  a  translation.  Even  the  ren- 
dering of  the  Septuagint,  "  a  helper  counterpart  to 
him,"  is  an  improvement  of  later  times  upon  its 
literal  primary  sense.  The  true  and  simple  mean- 
ing of  the  phrase  is  "  a  sexual  counterpart  "  of 
him,  and  there  is  nothing  more  implied  in  it  than 
this  expression  in  its  severest  physical  meaning  con- 
veys. In  its  application  to  woman,  in  the  second 
chapter  of  Genesis,  it  means  simply  the  female  of 
man,  as  it  might  that  of  any  other  animal,  with 
equal  propriety,  and  without  any  change.  And  we 
shall,  perhaps,  understand  the  true  spirit  and  mean- 
ing of  the  story  which  relates  the  creation  of  Eve 
and  her  presentation  to  Adam,  if  we  transcribe  it 
with  the  designations  of  the  woman  which  we  have 
just  examined,  substituted  in  their  primitive  literal 
sense :  — 

"  And  the  Lord  God  said,  it  is  not  good  that  the  man  l 
should  be  alone  :  I  will  make  a  sexual  counterpart  for  him. 

"  And  out  of  the  ground  the  Lord  God  formed  every  beast 
of  the  field,  and  every  fowl  of  the  air,  and  brought  them  unto 
the  man  to  see  what  he  would  call  them ;  and  whatsoever  the 
man  called  every  living  creature,  that  was  the  name  thereof. 

1  Throughout  this  passage,  the  original  for  "the  man"  is  HA 
ADAM,  except  where  we  have  otherwise  indicated. 


164  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

And  the  man  gave  names  to  all  cattle,  and  to  the  fowl  of  the 
air,  and  to  every  beast  of  the  field  :  but  for  the  man  there  was 
not  found  a  sexual  counterpart  for  him. 

"  And  the  Lord  God  caused  a  deep  sleep  to  fall  upon  the 
man,  and  he  slept ;  and  he  took  one  of  his  ribs,  and  closed  up 
the  flesh  instead  thereof.  And  the  rib  which  the  Lord  God 
had  taken  from  the  man,  made  he  a  woman,  [ISHA,  '  a  female 
man,']  and  brought  her  unto  the  man.  And  the  man  said, 
This  [i.  e.,  this  creature]  is  now  bone  of  my  bones,  and  flesh 
of  my  flesh :  she  [LE  ZOT,  not  the  personal  pronoun  '  she,' 
but  '  this  creature ']  shall  be  called  woman,  [ISHA,  '  female,'] 
because  she  was  taken  out  of  man,  [ISH,  '  male.']  There- 
fore shall  a  man  [ISH,  '  a  male  man ']  leave  his  father  and 
mother,  and  shall  cleave  unto  his  woman,  [ISHA,  his  '  female.'] 
and  they  shall  be  one  flesh."  (Ch.  ii.  l§-24.) 

An  attentive  consideration  of  this  account,  and 
of  the  few  verses  preceding  which  relate  the  forma- 
tion of  "  the  man,"  will  show  that  it  is  nothing 
more  than  a  detailed  relation  of  what  is  generally 
stated  in  ch.  i.  v.  27,  28,  —  "  So  God  created  man 
in  his  own  image :  in  the  image  of  God  created 
he  him ;  male  and  female  [ISH  and  ISHA]  created 
he  them.  And  God  blessed  them,  and  said,  [in 
precisely  the  words  employed  in  v.  22,  toward  the 
paired  animals,]  Be  fruitful,  and  multiply,  and  re- 
plenish the  earth,"  etc. 

Taking  the  two  accounts  together,  we  seem 
clearly  brought  to  the  following  deductions  of  fact : 
1st.  That  woman  was  originally  created  simply  in 
the  capacity  of  a  female  counterpart  of  man,  im- 
mediately after  his  reviewing  and  naming  the  paired 
animals,  and  in  order  that  his  condition  might  be 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  165 

made  as  complete  and  happy  as  theirs  in  this  respect ; 
2d.  That  this  female  counterpart,  when  created,  was 
presented  to  man,  by  the  Creator,  without  any  in- 
junction to  either  party,  regarding  the  marriage 
state,  that  implied  any  moral  obligation  in  it  to 
greater  exclusiveness  in  favor  of  each  other,  than 
was  imposed  upon  the  similar  relationships  of  the 
creatures  around  them  ;  3d.  That  though  Adam, 

9  O  * 

in  the  joy  of  his  first  reception  of  Eve,  expressed, 
with  a  lover's  poetic  enthusiasm,  and,  perhaps,  also 
with  a  prophet's  divine  inspiration,  (for  so  it  would 
appear  to  be  intimated  in  Matthew  xix.  4,  5,)  the 
ardent  affection  with  which  all  future  "  helpmeets  " 
should  be  regarded,  he  evidently  alludes  to  natural 
emotions  merely,  and  not  to  any  moral  obligations 
or  mutual  duties  involved  in  such  relationships,  and 
to  be  observed  by  himself  or  his  descendants.  His 
apostrophe  (which,  singularly  enough,  is  at  least  par- 
tially rhythmical)  is  simply  an  epithalamium,  —  a 
nuptial  song,  worthy,  both  in  subject  and  sentiment, 
to  be  what  it  is,  the  first  recorded  language  of  man  ; 

7  O         O 

but  it  certainly  is  not,  nor  does  it  recognize  as  its 
basis,  a  moral  code  of  matrimonial  law.1  It  ex- 

i  This  apostrophe  of  Adam  is  not  only  the  first  recorded  human  lan- 
guage, but  is,  it  would  appear,  a  poem  also,  and  that  poem  a  love-song. 
The  rude  and  partial  verbal  rhythm,  alluded  to  in  the  text,  has  little 
weight  in  establishing  its  poetical  character;  but  its  structure  strikingly 
illustrates  (though  with  primitive  simplicity)  that  rhythm  of  thought, 
with  the  gradational  parallelism,  and  antithesis  of  language  and  idea, 
which  are  the  true  indications  and  characteristics  of  early  Hebrew 
poetry.  Let  us  set  out  the  passage  with  reference  to  these  features :  — 


166  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

presses  the  closeness  of  the  marriage  tie,  but  refers 
solely  to  the  natural  passion  or  affection  of  the  ani- 
mal nature,  as  the  foundation  of  its  sympathies. 
"  This  is  now  bone  of  my  bones,  and  flesh  of  my 
flesh  :  therefore  (lit. '  upon  this  ')  shall  a  man  cleave 
(or  *  will  a  man  cleave,'  since  the  verb  in  the  origi- 
nal has  the  force  of  the  future)  unto  his  wife,  and 
they  shall  be  (i.  e.,  '  will  be ')  one  flesh."  In  this 
sense,  also,  Christ  presents  this  passage  in  Matthew 
six.  5,  6,  where  he  speaks  of  God  having  created 
man,  male  and  female,  and  having  said,  "  For  this 
cause  ("EVCKCV  TOWOV,  '  by  reason  of  this,'  or  '  on  ac- 
count of  this,  as  its  consequence ')  shall  a  man  leave 
(future,  KaroXeti/ret,  will  a  man  leave)  his  father 
and  mother,  and  shall  cleave  (will  cleave)  unto  his 
wife,"  etc. 

In  all  this,  therefore,  while  we  have  exhibited  to 
us  the  divinely  prepared  foundation  for  the  marriage 
relation,  drawn  from  man's  necessities,  and  im- 
planted deeply  in  his  nature,  we  yet  fail  to  find  that 

This  is  now  bone  of  my  bones  —  and  flesh  of  my  flesh. 

She  shall  be  called  Isha,  —  for  she  is  taken  out  of  Ish  ; 

Therefore  shall  Ish  leave  his  father  and  mother  —  and  cleave  to  his  Isha, 

And  they  two  —  shall  be  one  flesh. 

The  song  of  Lamech  to  his  wives  Adah  and  Zillah  (Gen.  iv.  23)  has 
been  supposed  to  be  the  first  poem  in  human  language ;  but  may  we 
not  rather  adopt  the  more  agreeable  conclusion,  that  the  earliest  poem 
is  found  in  the  first  recorded  human  utterance ;  and  that  instead  of  being 
the  bloodthirsty  howl  of  a  murdering  savage,  it  breathes  only  the  ex- 
pression of  the  tenderest  and  most  lasting  of  human  affections  ?  Thus 
from  the  very  first,  Love  and  War  have  lent  readiest  inspiration  to  the 
poetic  faculty. 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  167 

relation  itself,  in  the  development  of  its  moral  rights 
and  obligations.  The  situation  of  the  pair  resembles 
the  tender  and  sacred  state  of  betrothal,  hallowed 
by  a  communion  of  sympathies,  desires,  and  hopes, 
and  by  a  mutual  and  unchangeable  fidelity  in  af- 
fection ;  yet,  to  make  it  complete  in  matrimony,  it 
needed  the  solemn  and  definite  law  of  conjugal  duty, 
—  the  rule  of  "love,  honor,  and  obey,"  imposed  in 
the  mandate,  —  "  Thy  desire  shall  be  unto  thy  hus- 
band, and  he  shall  rule  over  thee."  It  is  curious  to 
remark,  though  it  may  be  accidental,  that  it  is  not 
until  after  this  new  phase  is  given  to  his  relations 
toward  Eve,  (in  chap.  iii.  16,)  that  Adam  dignifies 
her  with  a  proper  name.  Up  to  that  time,  he  applied 
to  her  only  a  general  sexual  designation,  — "  She 
shall  be  called  '  female,'  because  she  was  taken  out 
of  the  male."  But  after  that  period,  as  if,  with  his 
new  moral  perceptions,  he  regarded  her  from  a 
higher  point  of  view,  or  perhaps  from  some  new 
revelation  had  received  new  light  upon  the  nature 
and  purposes  of  marriage,  and  its  connection  with 
the  origin  of  future  generations,  he  calls  her  "  Eve, 
[HAVAH,  to  live,]  because  she  was  the  mother  of 
all  living."  Before  the  Divine  prescription  of  mat- 
rimonial duty,  —  the  marriage  ceremony,  if  we  may 
call  it  so,  —  he  views  her  like  a  lover,  in  the  light 
of  her  relations  to  himself;  after  that  event,  like  a 
husband  or  father,  in  that  of  her  relations  to  the 
family.  It  would  almost  seem  as  if  this  little  cir- 
cumstance, in  itself,  were  indicative  of  a  new  aspect 


168  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

in  their  relations  toward  each  other,  and  also  of  that 
in  which  it  consisted. 

We  see  then,  if  any  importance  is  to  be  attached 
to  the  foregoing  speculations,  that  not  only  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  Family,  but  also  the  moral  law 
of  marriage,  and  therefore,  as  we  may  almost  say, 
the  institution  of  marriage  itself,  was  a  part  of  the 
"  sentence  "  passed  upon  man  for  his  disobedience 
in  partaking  of  the  forbidden  fruit.  It  may  be  said 
that  the  omission  of  the  historian  to  refer  to  the 
prescription  of  such  duties  at  an  earlier  period,  is 
no  proof  that  they  were  not  imposed ;  but  if  so,  what 
is  the  force  of  the  future  in  the  address  to  Eve, 
which  would  seem  plainly  to  indicate  the  establish- 
ment of  a  new  order  of  things  thereafter  ?  "I  will 
greatly  multiply  thy  sorrow  and  conception,  and  thy 
desire  shall  be  unto  thy  husband,  and  he  shall  rule 
over  thee  ?  "  It  will  surely  not  be  denied  that  this 
announcement  was  made  in  consequence  of  the  dis- 
obedience, whereby  the  pair  had  acquired  the  knowl- 
edge of  good  and  evil ;  and  if  so,  it  must  be  admit- 
ted that,  before  that  fact,  this  law  of  conjugal  duty 
had  not,  at  least,  been  known  by  them,  and  but  for 
its  occurrence  would  never  have  been  revealed  or 
recognized.  But  if  it  were  a  thing  which  they  could 
not  have  known  or  recognized,  it  must  have  been 
so  on  account  of  their  want  of  moral  perceptions, 
and  therefore  could  not  have  subsisted  as  a  law 
binding  upon  them.  What  then  do  all  these  facts 
indicate  with  respect  to  the  moral  history  of  the  first 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  EVE.  169 

pair  ?  What,  with  relation  to  the  real  character  of 
these  "  sentences  of  punishment,"  so  called  ?  Could 
the  family  institution  and  the  moral  law  of  marriage 
have  been  intended  as  curses,  or  were  they  rather 
blessings  to  mankind  ?  Were  they  not  essential  and 
benevolent  means  of  preserving  the  purity  and  hap- 
piness, the  mental  and  physical  elevation,  of  the 
race  ?  —  laws  adapted  to  the  condition  of  moral 
creatures  alone,  but  for  such  indispensably  neces- 
sary ;  and  thus  manifesting,  in  their  establishment, 
the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God,  —  his  benevolence 
rather  than  his  severity  toward  the  human  race  ? 


170  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  SENTENCE  OF  ADAM. 

LET  us  now  direct  our  attention  to  "the  sen- 
tence "  addressed  to  Adam,  which  we  shall  find 
no  less  noteworthy  in  the  same  point  of  view :  — 

"  And  unto  Adam  he  said,  Because  thou  hast  hearkened 
unto  the  voice  of  thy  wife,  and  hast  eaten  of  the  tree,  of 
which  I  commanded  thee,  saying,  Thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it : 
cursed  is  the  ground  for  thy  sake ;  in  sorrow  shalt  thou  eat 
of  it  all  the  days  of  thy  life ;  thorns  also  and  thistles  shall  it 
bring  forth  to  thee ;  and  thou  shalt  eat  of  the  herb  of  the  field ; 
in  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt  thou  eat  bread,  till  thou  return 
[thy  returning]  unto  the  ground,  from  whence  thou  wast 
taken ;  for  dust  thou  art,  and  unto  dust  shalt  thou  return." 
(Ch.  iii.  17-20.) 

We  have  in  a  former  chapter  referred  to  sev- 
eral reasons  why  this  passage  cannot  be  regarded  as 
the  denouncement  of  a  penalty,  and  it  will  be  found 
that  a  careful  analysis  of  it  —  such  as  shall  convey 
to  us  its  exact  scope  and  meaning  —  will  confirm 
the  view  we  have  taken.  What  then  is  the  real 
purport,  and  what  are  the  effects  implied  in  and 
resulting  from  this  "  sentence  "  of  Adam  ? 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  obvious  that  the  degree  of 
toil  which  it  seems  to  impose  upon  man,  is  only 
such  as  may  be  requisite  to  draw  from  the  earth  a 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  ADAM.  171 

sufficient  and  comfortable  subsistence.  No  mandate 
or  necessity  is  laid  upon  him  to  labor  without  pur- 
pose, or  for  any  other  purpose  than  barely  to  main- 
tain life.  He  is  not  even  required  to  do  this  as,  in 
itself,  an  obligation.  Work  is  announced  to  him 
not  as  a  duty  or  a  punishment,  but  as  a  means  "  to 
eat  bread  "  ;  in  other  words,  as  a  simple  condition 
of  existence  ;  and  the  light  labor  which  the  tiller  of 
the  soil  finds  necessary  for  this  single  end,  is  the 
standard  and  the  measure  of  the  burden  which  is 
thus  intended  to  be  divinely  imposed.  Hence  the 
forced  and  weary  toil  of  bondsmen,  or  the  drudgery 
of  starving  operatives  in  an  overcrowded  population, 
whose  half-paid  exertions  contend  vainly  against  des- 
titution and  lingering  death,  are  not  to  be  cited  as 
illustrations  of  the  sentence.  These  small  though  sad 
exceptions  to  the  general  lot  of  mankind  are  no  part 
of  a  system  ordained  by  the  wise  and  benevolent 
Creator,  but  spring  from  the  avarice  and  injustice 
of  men  in  artificial  states  of  society,  denying  to  hon- 
est industry  its  justly  earned  reward.  From  such 
toil  there  rises  before  the  Almighty,  not  the  sigh 
(well  pleasing  to  him)  of  that  light  sorrow  by  him 
decreed  in  the  law  of  natural  and  healthful  labor, 
but  the  cry  of  the  hireling  kept  back  of  his  wages, 
which,  when  it  enters  the  ear,  awakens  the  indicnia- 

*  *  O 

tion  of  the  Lord  God  of  Sabaoth.  Neither  are  we 
to  refer  to  it  the  incessant  and  exhausting  toil  to 
which  we  see  men  voluntarily  devoting  themselves 
on  every  side,  to  satisfy  the  demands  of  greed,  or 


172  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

pride,  or  the  more  elevated  ambition  of  the  student 
or  scholar,  the  leader  or  the  benefactor  of  his  race. 
Even  that  honorable  and  useful  labor,  whose  pur- 
pose is  to  promote,  by  the  progress  of  science  and 
civilization,  the  comfort  and  happiness  of  mankind, 
forms  no  part  of  "the  sentence."  It  plainly  pre- 
scribes to  man,  not  the  general  duty  of  industry  and 
thrift,  but  so  much  and  only  so  much  labor  as  his 
simplest  wants  shall  require  to  supply  them.  Beyond 
that,  every  exertion  that  he  ever  makes,  whether 
for  comfort,  or  for  ostentation,  for  wealth,  for  power, 
for  learning,  for  his  own  selfish  purposes,  for  the 
love  of  God  or  the  good  of  men,  commendable  and 
useful  as  it  may  be,  or  the  opposite,  has  yet  no  con- 
nection whatever  with  this  divine  decree,  that  the 
bare  necessaries  of  life  should  be  earned  by  his  ex- 
ertions. 

But  having  thus  ascertained  the  purport  of  this 
passage,  we  are  at  once  led  to  remark  two  consider- 
ations with  respect  to  it. 

The  first  of  these  is,  that  the  amount  of  labor 
imposed  upon  man  by  "  the  sentence,"  is  very  in- 
considerable, and  constitutes,  in  fact,  no  noticeable 
burden  in  his  condition.  How  slight  is  the  degree 
of  industry  required  to  extract  a  subsistence  from 
the  ground  in  any  habitable  part  of  the  earth,  and 
especially  in  by  far  its  larger  portion,  and  among 
the  vast  majority  of  mankind,  a  very  little  consid- 
eration will  remind  us.  It  is  not  so  great  but  that 
in  many  climates  it  is  practically  nothing,  and  in 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  ADAM.  173 

most  it  is  greatly  less  than  man's  best  interests  re- 
quire ;  so  that  if  this  "  sentence  "  is  indeed  a  curse, 
to  have  made  it  more  bitter  would  have  been  a  ben- 
efit to  the  race.  It  is  not  so  great  but  that  in  the 
most  sterile  and  unproductive  spots  which  man  in- 
habits, the  hours  need  be  comparatively  few  where- 
in he  who  is  prudent  and  careful  must  labor  in  order 
to  live.  The  complaining,  then,  against  our  great 
progenitor,  and  of  this  "  sad  sentence  "  pronounced 
upon  him  and  his  posterity,  at  times  when  our  own 
selfish  ambition,  or  possibly,  in  some  rare  cases,  the 
oppressions  of  an  artificial  social  state,  make  us  to 
groan  under  the  fatigue  of  toil,  as  if  the  load  we 
thus  bear,  either  voluntarily  or  by  compulsion,  were 
the  ordinance  of  God,  in  punishment  for  Adam's 
sin,  is  unjust,  both  to  our  Maker  and  to  our  original 
ancestor.  Let  the  censure,  if  any  is  due  for  our 
excessive  burdens,  fall  on  more  modern  shoulders 
than  those  of  Adam,  and  let  those  only  find  fault 
with  him  for  the  labors  of  life  who  are  averse  to  all 
work,  even  the  most  moderate  and  salutary. 

The  other  consideration  is,  that  from  so  small  an 
amount  of  labor,  as  we  thus  see  to  be  actually  requi- 
site for  subsistence,  we  have  no  reason  to  suppose, 
either  from  the  inspired  narrative  or  from  man's 
own  constitution,  that  he  was  ever,  even  in  his  orig- 
inal condition,  exempt.  The  first  injunction  laid 
upon  him,  when  his  mission  in  ,the  world  was  an- 
nounced, was  that  he  should  "  replenish  the  earth 
and  subdue  it  "  ;  subdue  it  by  the  enlargement  of 


174  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

his  faculties,  by  the  exertion  of  his  mental  and 
physical  powers,  by  the  cultivation  of  those  numer- 
ous arts  and  sciences  whereby  the  face  of  Nature  is 
changed,  and  its  thousand  materials  worked  and 
fashioned  into  the  instruments  of  his  necessities,  con- 
venience, or  pleasure.  And  as  the  first  step  in  this 
study  and  conquest  of  Nature,  he  was  placed  in  the 
Garden  of  Eden  "to  till  it,"  — (not  merely  "to 
dress  it,"  as  our  translation  renders  the  phrase.)  It 
is  worthy  of  notice,  that  the  same  word  in  the  origi- 
nal is  used  in  ch.  ii.  5,  where,  speaking  of  the  world 
before  man's  creation,  it  says :  "  There  was  not  a 
man  to  till  the  ground  ;  "  in  v.  15,  "  The  Lord  God 
took  the  man  and  placed  him  in  the  garden  to  till 
it ;  "  and  in  v.  23,  "  The  Lord  God  sent  him  forth 
from  the  garden  to  till  the  ground  from  whence  he 
was  taken."  Thus  it  appears  that  man  was  never 
intended  to  be  idle.  Even  before  his  creation  he  was 
wanted  that  he  might  cultivate  the  soil ;  and  it  ap- 
pears, too,  that  the  same  kind  of  employment,  if  not 
the  same  degree,  was  expected  of  him  before  as  after 
the  sentence.  It  was  to  till  the  soil  that  he  was 
placed  in  Paradise  ;  it  was  to  do  no  more  that  he  was 
sent  forth  therefrom,  with  what  is  called  "  the  curse 
of  toil "  hanging  over  him  ;  as  if  this  were  a  new  ex- 
perience, instead  of  being,  from  the  first,  a  necessity 
of  his  nature.  God,  who  made  him  in  his  own  im- 
age, did  not  design  that  he  should  wander  listlessly 
and  aimlessly  over  the  earth,  while  He  himself,  in 
ceaseless  displays  of  his  infinite  power,  was  finding 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  ADAM.  175 

constant  occupation  for  his  own  activities.  Indeed, 
we  cannot  for  a  moment  contemplate  man's  being, 
with  its  wondrous  energies  and  combinations,  both 
physical  and  intellectual,  without  being  impressed 
with  the  conviction  that  he  was  a  creature  made  for 
work.  This  is  his  mission,  his  necessity,  his  enjoy- 
ment. In  his  normal  state  he  can  no  more  be  kept 
back  from  it,  than  he  can  be  restrained  from  his 
food  and  his  breath.  He  seeks  it,  not  merely  for  its 
rewards,  but  for  itself, —  not  only/w  an  end,  but  as 
an  end.  He  invents  it,  and  calls  it  "  play  "  ;  and  if 
shut  up  and  prevented  from  finding  it,  or  making  it, 
he  loses  his  reason  and  dies.  Hence,  as  we  have 
already  remarked,  the  small  amount  of  labor  which 
is  imposed  by  the  sentence,  as  one  of  his  conditions 
of  existence,  is  by  no  means  the  limit  with  which 
men  can  content  themselves.  Had  it  been  so,  the 
world  would  have  been  standing  these  thousands  of 
years  since  the  creation,  unimproved  and  uninhab- 
ited, except  by  a  straggling,  imbecile,  and  barbarous 
race.  Before,  and  at  the  very  time  that  that  "  sen- 
tence "  was  pronounced  upon  man,  there  existed 
within  him  capacities  and  impulses  to  labor,  in  view 
of  which  such  an  ordinance,  were  it  construed  as  a 
punishment,  or  even  as  a  mandate,  might  well  be 
wondered  at  for  its  apparent  superfluousness  and 
insignificance. 

But  if  the  sentence  imposed  no  new  burdens  of 
toil  upon  man,  either  with  respect  to  obligation 
or  amount,  wherein  did  it  change  his  situation  ?  for 


176  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

it  must  be  allowed  that  it  did  so  in  some  manner. 
It  changed  it  simply  by  making  that  labor  a  neces- 
sity which  was  before  a  recreation.  It  made  oc- 
cupation —  work  —  unavoidable,  instead  of  being 
merely  the  voluntary  expression  of  a  natural  in- 
stinct. Man  previously,  as  we  have  seen,  loved 
labor,  as  he  now  does,  for  its  own  sake,  as  a  means 
of  employing  his  restless  powers,  but  he  was  under 
no  compulsion  of  circumstances  to  engage  in  it. 
The  ground  and  the  flocks  supplied  him  with  all  the 
means  of  life,  without  his  care,  and  the  mental  and 
physical  labor  which  he  put  forth  was  superfluous, 
except  as  a  mode  of  enjoyment.  Had  he  ever 
fallen  (as  he  might  well  in  time  have  done)  into 
habits  of  sloth  and  self-indulgence,  consulting  his 
own  ease  and  permitting  his  noble  faculties  to  sink 
into  supineness  and  decay,  still  the  teeming  earth 
and  the  abounding  herds  would  have  supplied  him 
with  plenteous  stores  of  food  and  clothing,  and  spon- 
taneously ministered  to  his  every  need.  There  was, 
therefore,  no  pressure  upon  him  to  hold  him  per- 
force to  those  habits  of  industry  by  which  alone 
he  could  properly  develop  his  capacities  and  pre- 
serve his  native  vigor.  In  the  circumstances,  in- 
deed, of  his  primeval  existence,  under  the  immediate 
eye  and  guidance  of  his  Maker,  he  was  in  little 
danger  of  being  permitted  to  become  the  prey  of 
indolence  or  self-indulgence,  and  therefore  there 
was  little  or  no  occasion  for  such  external  constraint. 
Then  he  was  like  a  child  under  the  parental  super- 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  ADAM.  177 

vision,  who  needs  not  to  be  confined  to  any  regular 
business  or  employment ;  but  now,  when  he  had 
become  a  moral  agent,  and  like  the  youth  entering 
upon  life,  was  to  be  thrown  chiefly  upon  himself  for 
moral  training  and  direction,  a  provision  of  this  sort 
became  of  too  much  importance  to  be  longer  defer- 
red. At  once,  and  "  because "  man  had  accom- 
plished the  act  whereby  he  had  entered  upon  a  state 
of  moral  agency,  —  "  because "  in  this  condition 
newly  entered  on,  idleness  was  not  only  vicious  but 
the  parent  of  vice,  —  and  "  because"  as  a  moral 
agent,  habits  of  industry  were  essential  for  the 
preservation  of  his  moral  virtue,  as  well  as  his  gen- 
eral progress  and  well  being,  a  change  "  in  his  be- 
half," or  "  on  his  account,"  is  caused  to  pass  upon 
the  fruitful  soil.  It  does  not  appear  necessarily  that 
the  ground  was  rendered  less  productive  than  be- 
fore ;  indeed,  it  may  have  been  made  even  more  so ; 
but  it  seems  that  whereas  it  had  previously  brought 
forth  the  useful  fruits  unmixed  with  others,  and  so 
without  occasion  for  special  cultivation  and  care, 
thenceforth  it  was  liable  to  produce  with  them 
intruding  weeds  and  brambles,  whose  extirpation 
should  tax  the  strength  and  patience  of  the  husband- 
man. This  seems  inferable  from  the  phraseology 
of  "  the  sentence  "  itself.  "  Because  thou  hast 
done  this,  and  hast  eaten  of  the  tree,  etc.,  (and  hast 
thus  become  a  moral  being,)  cursed  is  the  ground 
for  thy  sake  (literally,  '  on  thy  account ').  In  sor- 
row shalt  thou  eat  of  it  (i.  e.,  thy  eating  of  it 
12 


178  THE  EISE   AND  THE  FALL. 

shall  not  be  as  heretofore  without  labor,  but  only 
through  its  cultivation)  all  the  days  of  thy  life. 
Thorns  also  and  thistles  (as  well  as  harvests,  and 
among  them)  shall  it  bring  forth  to  thee,  and  thou 
shalt  eat  of  the  herb  of  the  field,  (i.  e.,  thou  shalt 
not  be  able  to  rely  on  the  spontaneous  productions 
of  the  ground  for  thy  subsistence,  but  shalt  be 
compelled  to  delve  after  it  in  the  land  which  thou 
shalt  till.)  In  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt  thou  eat 
bread,  (i.  e.,  the  sweat  of  thy  face,  thy  labor,  shall 
not  be  for  mere  recreation  as  heretofore,  but  thine 
eating  of  bread  shall  depend  on  it,)  until  thou  re- 
turn (thy  returning)  unto  the  ground  from  whence 
thou  wert  taken." 

It  now  remains  for  us  to  inquire  more  particularly 
the  force  of  the  expression  "  because  thou  hast  done 
this,"  in  connection  with  the  announcement  of  "  the 
sentence."  It  plainly  implies  that,  but  for  the  diso- 
bedience, the  necessity  of  labor  would  have  been 
unknown  by  man.  What  reasons  may  be  supposed, 
then,  for  placing  man  under  this  necessity,  after  his 
becoming  a  moral  agent,  which  did  not  obtain  be- 
fore that  event  ?  And  having  answered  this  in- 
quiry, we  shall  briefly  consider  what  was  the  pur- 
pose, and  what  have  been  the  effects  of  this  neces- 
sity upon  man's  condition  and  history. 

One  reason  why  man  had  less  occasion  to  be  sub- 
jected to  this  necessity  of  labor,  before  he  became 
a  moral  agent,  has  been  already  hinted.  Under  the 
Divine  direction  and  influence,  he  was  sure  to  be 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  ADAM.  179 

kept  sufficiently  and  profitably  occupied.  When  he 
passed  from  that  immediate  supervision,  to  be  thrown 
more  upon  himself,  this  necessity  was  required  in 
order  to  supply,  in  a  measure,  the  place  of  that 
parental  authority  ;  like  it,  to  prevent  his  lapsing 
into  inactivity,  and  to  ensure,  in  some  degree,  the 
discipline  and  cultivation  of  his  various  faculties. 
Another  reason,  and  an  obvious  one,  is,  that  while 
he  was  unconscious  of  moral  distinctions,  idleness 
and  torpor,  though  degrading,  would  not  be  crimi- 
nal, nor  subject  him  to  responsibility  ;  but  after  re- 
ceiving his  moral  nature,  they  would  be  fatal  ene- 
mies, not  only  to  his  natural  but  to  his  spiritual 
welfare,  and  thus  the  necessity  of  labor  would  then 
become  desirable  to  be  imposed  as  a  protection 
against  sin.  But  even  were  these  and  other  reasons 
of  less  weight,  there  is  one  consideration,  derived 
from  the  general  plan  of  God  in  man's  creation, 
which  seems  of  itself  to  afford  an  adequate  answer 
to  the  inquiry  why  man's  attaining  or  not  a  moral 
sense,  should  make  a  difference  with  respect  to  this 
provision  of  labor. 

Man  was  created  that  he  might  become  a  moral 
being.  With  reference  to  this  end,  and  to  be  of 
service  in  his  moral  career,  all  his  noble  faculties  of 
every  kind  were  imparted.  Unless,  therefore,  he 
should  attain  to  this  position,  he  would  have  been 
created  in  vain,  and  his  progress  and  even  his  exist- 
ence would  be  aimless  and  profitless.  It  is  need- 
less to  speculate  as  to  what  disposition  of  him  would, 


180        THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

in  that  case,  have  been  made  by  his  Creator,  since 
the  contingency  did  not  and  would  not  occur.  The 
end  of  his  creation  was  accomplished  in  full  accord- 
ance with  his  Maker's  intention  and  foreknowledge, 
without  which  certain  foreknowledge  man  would 
never  have  been  formed.  But  it  is  plain  to  be 
seen,  that,  so  long  as  he  should  remain,  like  the 
brutes,  ignorant  of  moral  principles,  so  long  there 
could  be  no  reason  for  his  development  in  other 
respects  more  than  for  theirs.  As  he  would  not  be 
filling  his  appointed  station  in  the  divine  system,  it 
might  well  be  a  matter  of  indifference  whether  he 
advanced  or  receded  in  the  scale  of  being.  Hence, 
could  we  conceive  of  the  race  as  now  existing  in  a 
state  of  entire  moral  darkness,  we  may  well  suppose 
that  it  would  have  been  left  without  the  incentives 
to  progress  which  the  necessity  of  labor  provides, 
and  which  seem  essential  to  preserve  it  from  stagna- 
tion and  decline.  On  the  other  hand,  men  having 
attained  to  moral  perceptions,  and  having  entered 
thereby  on  the  course  for  which  they  were  designed, 
it  is  easy  to  see  that  the  divine  aim  would  be  to 
hold  and  encourage  them  in  it,  and  to  provide  for 
their  general  advancement,  and  that  this  purpose 
and  its  execution  might  well  be  announced  to  Adam 
in  the  terms,  — "  '  Because  '  thou  hast  become  thus, 
let  labor  never  fail  thee,  not  only  as  thy  necessity 
and  thy  discipline,  but  as  a  mainspring  of  thy  prog- 
ress." 

"While  upon  the  force  of  the  word  "  because,"  in 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  ADAM.  181 

this  connection,  we  may  again  refer  to  a  fact  ad- 
verted to  upon  a  preceding  page,  in  our  argument 
that  this  "  sentence  "  is  not  the  denouncement  of  a 
penalty  for  sin.  We  refer  to  the  fact  that  the  most 
numerous,  direct,  inevitable,  and  fearful  of  the  tem- 
poral punishments  for  sin,  —  diseases,  poverty,  vio- 
lence, and  the  thousand  other  forms  of  physical  and 
mental  anguish  which  guilty  deeds  produce,  —  are 
entirely  unnoticed.  Were  these  evils  really  and  only 
the  penalties  of  sin,  in  such  sense  that  but  for  sin 
(i.  e.,  the  moral  quality  of  an  act)  they  would  have 
been  unknown  by  man,  then,  surely,  in  an  especial 
sense  they  would  have  ensued  "  because "  he  had 
become  a  possible  (or  upon  the  ordinary  view,  an 
actual)  sinner.  How  is  it  then  that  these  tremen- 
dous experiences  are  ignored,  and  the  slight  and 
beneficial  toil  by  which  man  earns  his  subsistence  is 
alone  referred  to  ?  The  explanation  lies  in  the 
truth  which  we  have  before  suggested,  and  which 
science,  reason,  and  revelation  itself,  alike  confirm. 
These  sad  experiences  did  not  enter  the  world  as  the 
effects  of  moral  guilt.  They  did  not  ensue  to  man 
"  because  "  he  had  become  a  moral  agent,  or  a  sin- 
ner. They  are  the  fruits,  not  of  a  moral  quality  in 
his  actions,  but  of  appetites  and  passions  created  in 
him  as  in  all  other  creatures  anterior  and  subse- 
quent to  his  origin,  and  which  have  ever  produced 
these  identical  fruits  in  those  other  races  upon  which 
no  curse  was  ever  denounced.  The  author  of  "  Na- 
ture and  the  Supernatural,"  under  the  pressure  of 


182  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

the  common  view,  alluding  to  these  pre-Adamite 
confusions  and  woes,  calls  them  "  the  anticipative 
consequences  of  sin  "  ;  insisting  that  God,  because  he 
foresaw  the  miseries,  curses,  and  disorder  that  man's 
rebellion  would  introduce  in  his  system,  indicated 
that  foreknowledge,  not  by  providing  against  them, 
—  not  by  displaying  the  harmony  and  peace  that 
would  have  prevailed  but  for  man's  delinquency,  but 
by  himself  scattering  misery,  curses,  and  ruin  among 
the  antecedent  races  ;  as  if  he  were  bent  on  having 
a  symmetry  of  disorder,  if  any  there  must  be  at  all. 
Such  a  view  we  cannot  adopt.  That  there  may  be 
"  anticipative  consequences,"  we  will  not  deny ;  but 
that  these  are  ever  exhibited  in  deliberate  illustra- 
tions or  aggravations  of  the  evils  foreseen,  instead 
of  attempted  remedies  for  them,  is  more  difficult  to 
believe.  Rather  let  us  suppose  that  God,  in  his  pro- 
gressive plan  of  creation,  had  not  yet  seen  fit  to  in- 
troduce beings  either  physically  or  spiritually  per- 
fect ;  that  accordingly  man  himself  was  formed  in 
his  inception  more  after  the  similitude  of  the  inferior 
creatures  than  his  Maker  intended  he  should  event- 
ually be,  when  in  the  distant  and  higher  stages  of 
his  moral  existence ;  that  he  was  created,  therefore, 
with  the  same  innate  passions  as  the  races  before 
him  ;  that  these  passions,  had  he  been  left  in  his 
original  state,  without  a  moral  sense,  and  without 
the  necessity  of  labor  to  break  and  restrain  their 
force,  would  have  raged  with  violence  tenfold 
greater  than  they  do,  being  curbed  by  these  provi- 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  ADAM.  183 

sions ;  and  that,  therefore,  such  evils  as  do,  notwith- 
standing all,  spring  from  them,  so  far  from  being 
properly  ranked  among  the  consequences  that  were 
to  ensue  "  because  "  he  "  did  this,"  were  themselves 
(being  divinely  foreseen)  among  the  reasons  why 
he  was  permitted  to  do  as  he  did,  and  on  account 
of  which  "  the  sentence  "  was  pronounced. 

The  purpose  and  the  effects  of  "  the  sentence  " 
upon  man's  character  and  destiny,  after  what  has 
been  said,  need  not  be  largely  dwelt  upon.  That 
it  was  intended  not  to  enhance  man's  burdens  be- 
yond what  Nature  and  his  best  interests  would,  in 
any  event,  have  dictated,  has  been  already  shown ; 
and  that  the  necessity  of  moderate  labor,  as  a  con- 
dition of  existence,  was  therefore  designed  as  a 
blessing  and  a  benefit  to  man,  were  it  not  suscep- 
tible of  proof  by  argument,  has  been  abundantly 
demonstrated  by  experience.  What  the  history  of 
mankind  would  have  been,  even  in  a  state  of  inno- 
cence, had  not  labor  been  requisite  for  their  subsist- 
ence, let  the  races  of  men  in  those  climes  where 
Nature's  profusion  dispenses  with  toil,  —  let  those 
families,  everywhere  to  be  found,  in  which  physical 
and  mental  decline  proceed  down  generations  of  idle- 
ness, suffice  to  indicate  !  Let  not  man's  sentence  to 
labor,  then,  be  termed  a  curse  !  A  thousand  times 
more  truly  and  terribly  would  the  sentence  have 
proved  a  curse  had  it  exonerated  him  forever  from 
that  hard  necessity. 

Indeed,  the  direct  advantage  of  labor  to  mankind 


184  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

through  its  influence  on  the  individual,  in  invigorat- 
ing and  enlarging  the  faculties,  and  in  checking  the 
growth  of  dangerous  and  degrading  passions,  is  but 
a  small  though  important  part  of  the  benefits  it  con- 
fers. Its  necessity  for  man's  subsistence,  if  it  does 
not  actually  originate  the  ideas  of  property  and  its 
rights,  is  certainly  most  intimately  blended  with 
them  ;  for  it  may  be  questioned  whether,  were  labor 
only  a  recreation  and  amusement,  its  product  would 
be  regarded  as  sacred  in  the  possessor.  This  neces- 
sity of  toil,  therefore,  lies  at  the  foundation  of  social 
and  political  institutions,  and  is  intimately  connected 
with  civil  order  and  security.  Moreover,  the  fact 
that  in  human  society  the  subsistence  of  every  mem- 
ber is  dependent  upon  labor  in  some  field  of  useful- 
ness, gives  rise  to  the  thousand  different  forms  of 
human  industry,  by  which  the  happiness,  the  com- 
fort, and  the  advancement  of  society  are  promoted, 
and  which  would,  for  the  most  part,  lie  dormant, 
did  not  necessitv  arouse  them  to  action.  Thus  on 

•/ 

every  side,  in  the  individual  and  in  society,  we  per- 
ceive the  beneficial  effects  of  "  the  sentence  "  to 
work  in  order  to  eat.  Where  law  and  order,  vir- 
tue, learning,  and  civilization  prevail,  and  where 
ignorance,  barbarism,  vice,  and  violence  darken  the 
earth,  we  find,  in  one  guise  or  another,  the  proof 
how  justly  and  significantly  our  English  version 
renders  it,  — "  Cursed  is  the  ground  for  thy  sake  !  " 

"  That  like  an  emmet  thou  must  ever  toil, 
Is  a  sad  sentence  of  an  ancient  date,  — 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  ADAM.  185 

And  certes,  there  is  for  it  reason  great ; 
For  though  it  sometimes  make  thee  weep  and  wail, 
And  curse  thy  stars,  and  early  rise  and  late, 
Withouten  that  would  come  an  heavier  bale,  — 
Loose  life,  unruly  passions,  and  diseases  pale." 

The  closing  portion  of  the  narrative  is  consistent 
with  our  view  :  — 

"  Unto  Adam  also  and  to  his  wife  did  the  Lord  God  make 
coats  of  skins,  and  clothed  them.  And  the  Lord  God  said, 
Behold,  the  man  is  become  as  one  of  us,  to  know  good  and 
evil :  and  now,  lest  he  put  forth  his  hand,  and  take  also  of  the 
tree  of  life,  and  eat,  and  live  for  ever :  therefore  the  Lord  God 
sent  him  forth  from  the  garden  of  Eden,  to  till  the  ground 
from  whence  he  was  taken.  So  he  drove  out  the  man :  and 
he  placed  at  the  east  of  the  garden  of  Eden  cherubim,  and  a 
flaming  sword  which  turned  every  way  to  keep  the  way  of  the 
tree  of  life." 

We  here  behold  the  Almighty  manifesting  his 
approval  of  the  emotions  and  acts  which  were  the 
first  results  of  the  pair's  disobedience,  by  clothing 
them  more  perfectly.  We  find  him  also  referring 
to  the  change  that  had  been  wrought  in  them,  not 
as  a  lapse  "  into  a  fallen  and  depraved  nature,  come 
under  his  wrath  and  curse,"  but  as  an  advance  to 
an  increased  resemblance  to  himself;  and  finally, 
we  see  him  removing  them  from  Eden  with  no 
mark  of  displeasure,  but  simply  as  a  prudent  pro- 
vision against  a  foreseen  contingency.  Our  English 
phrase,  "  drove  out  the  man,"  implies  an  idea  of 
anger  which  the  original  does  not  convey.  The 
expression  signifies  merely  "  a  total  separation,  or 


186  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

exclusion,  as  in  an  act  of  divorce."  That  this 
exclusion  took  place  not  as  a  retribution  but  as 
a  precautionary  measure,  and  in  order  that  man 
might  enter  upon  his  purposed  career,  is  expressly 
stated.  It  was  "  lest  he  should  put  forth  his  hand 
and  take  also  of  the  tree  of  life,  and  eat,  and  live 
for  ever,  therefore  the  Lord  God  sent  him  forth 
from  the  garden,  to  till  the  ground  from  whence  he 
was  taken."  His  mission  in  Eden  was  terminated  ; 
thenceforth  his  field  was  the  World ;  the  true  his- 
tory of  mankind  was  now  to  commence. 


ELUCIDATION  BY  HYPOTHESIS.  187 


CHAPTER  X. 
ELUCIDATION  BY  HYPOTHESIS. 

IN  the  study  we  have  given  of  the  historic  rec- 
ord, we  have  aimed  simply  to  ascertain  and  apply 
its  true  interpretation,  assuming  that  the  facts  which 
it  relates,  and  the  moral  system  which  they  inaugu- 
rated were  in  exact  fulfilment  of  the  original  and 

O 

only  plan  of  the  Creator.  It  has  been  our  purpose  to 
examine  the  moral  system  as  we  find  it,  designing  to 
show  that,  standing  alone,  it  is  complete,  consistent, 
and  benevolent  in  itself;  and  that  there  is  no  need 
to  apologize  for  it  by  the  doctrine  that  it  was  forced 
upon  God's  adoption,  against  his  will,  as  a  substitute 
for  a  better  one  originally  planned  by  him,  and  pre- 
ferred for  his  creatures  could  he  have  had  his  way. 
We  have  confined  ourselves  to  the  point  of  view 
indicated  for  several  reasons,  and  especially  because 
we  believe  that  no  moral  system  can  be  justified  as 
the  adopted  plan  of  an  omnipotent  God,  which  is 
not  in  itself  justifiable.  Moreover,  the  plea  of  ne- 
cessity, while  it  involves  the  difficult  theory  of  a  dis- 
appointed Omniscient,  and  a  baffled  Almighty,  im- 
poses also  the  task  of  contriving  a  conjectural  better 
system  than  that  which  the  Allwise  has  seen  fit  to 
adopt,  in  order  that  it  may  be  assumed  to  have 


188  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

been  his  preference,  without  sufficient  evidence  that 
he  ever  conceived  it.  It  is  (among  others)  a  strong 
objection  to  the  common  view,  (that  the  disobe- 
dience hurled  mankind  into  ruin,)  that  a  resort  to 
such  hypothesis  of  a  purposed  better  system  than 
the  existing  one  is  necessarily  involved  in  it ;  and 
this  necessity  has  led  to  various  conflicting  theories 
as  to  the  details  of  that  defeated  scheme,  most  of 
them  more  or  less  inconsistent  with  themselves,  and 
all  of  them  full  of  difficulties  and  without  adequate 
support  in  Revelation.  In  the  present  discussion, 
therefore,  we  have  carefully  abstained  from  such 
uncertain  conjectures  as  to  what  might  have  been, 
preferring  to  confine  ourselves  to  the  moral  system 
which  actually  prevails,  to  ascertain  the  true  mode 
of  its  introduction,  to  discover  its  general  features, 
and  trace  its  general  progress. 

But  wrhile  we  thus  deprecate  the  resort  to  hypoth- 
esis as  a  means  of  justifying  the  moral  system,  or 
conveniently  getting  rid  of  inexplicable  difficulties 
in  it,  and  while  we  see  no  necessity  for  it  for  either 
purpose  under  the  view  which  we  maintain,  we 
may  yet  be  permitted  to  anticipate  the  inquiry  by 
some  minds,  whether  that  view  may  not  discover 
confirmation  or  elucidation  from  a  stand-point  out- 
side of  itself,  and  suggested  by  admitted  facts  or 
principles.  Such  inquirers  may  possibly  also  urge 
that  notwithstanding  the  proof  that  man,  through 
the  disobedience,  was  advanced  in  the  scale  of 
being,  they  cannot  entirely  divest  themselves  of 


ELUCIDATION  BY  HYPOTHESIS.  189 

the  idea  that  somehow,  nevertheless,  that  act  was 
calamitous  to  the  race,  and  displeasing  to  God,  and 
that  the  divine  mandate  not  to  partake  of  the  tree 
of  knowledge,  was  designed  for  man's  benefit,  and 
sincerely  intended  for  his  observance.  They  may, 
therefore,  desire  to  know  whether  such  impressions 
are  necessarily  incompatible  with  our  general  view, 
and  if  not,  in  what  way  the  consistency  can  be  ex- 
hibited. In  the  present  chapter,  therefore,  we  de- 
sign to  show  that  by  a  simple  hypothesis  entirely 
accordant  with  the  foregoing  views,  and  not  dis- 
countenanced by  other  parts  of  this  narrative,  and 
of  Scripture,  all  these  inquiries  and  difficulties  can 
be  readily  and  satisfactorily  solved. 

Let  us  suppose  that  the  human  pair  were  placed 
in  Eden  in  their  primitive  state  of  moral  ignorance 
with  the  purpose,  or  at  least  the  preference  on  the 
part  of  God,  of  training  them  there  by  a  special 
process  for  the  possession  of  the  moral  sense ;  —  the 
contemplation  being  that  they  should  receive  that 
faculty  only  after  having  been  fully  prepared,  by 
this  preliminary  instruction  and  development,  to 
become,  like  the  angels,  moral  agents,  without  the 
liability  of  falling  into  sin.  Then  the  prohibition 
against  eating  would  be  a  prohibition  of  premature 
knowledge,  and  would  be  strictly  intended  for  obe- 
dience. And  if  we  farther  suppose  that  the  privi- 
lege of  immortality  was  to  be  within  man's  reach  in 
case  he  waited  for  his  moral  sense  until  he  should 
thus  be  secure  of  undeviating  holiness  in  connection 


190  THE  BISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

with  his  endless  life,  we  can  easily  appreciate  the 
force  of  the  warning  that  the  result  of  his  disobe- 
dience would  be  inevitable  death. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  God  so  ex- 
pected or  designed  that  Adam  would  refrain  from 
partaking,  as  that  he  was  disappointed  at  the  actual 
result.  On  the  contrary,  we  must  believe  that  he 
fully  anticipated  the  disobedience,  and  that  the 
world  and  all  its  races  were  framed  with  full  refer- 
ence to  the  moral  system  that  finally  came  to  pre- 
vail in  it.  But  it  may  have  been  a  part  of  this 
same  divine  scheme,  that,  before  the  designed  sys- 
tem should  be  entered  upon,  and  as  a  mode  of  intro- 
ducing it,  Man  —  an  intellectual  being,  fully  com- 
petent to  exercise  his  reason  —  should  have  placed 
before  him  the  opportunity  of  immortal  existence  on 
earth  through  obedience,  with  the  alternative  of 
mortality  and  moral  frailty  in  case  of  transgression. 
We  may  then  believe  that  the  first  pair,  having  full 
freedom  of  choice  and  action,  by  an  act  of  folly 
(but  not  of  sin)  prematurely  entered  upon  their 
moral  career,  and  so  fastened  upon  the  race  the  ex- 
isting moral  system,  with  its  pains  and  disabilities,  in 
place  of  that  purer  and  loftier  destiny  which  man 
might  otherwise  have  enjoyed.  From  that  time 
onward,  the  moral  system  has  consisted,  not  (as 
generally  taught)  of  remedial  measures  to  repair 
a  ruin,  and  restore  a  lost  original  holiness,  but  of 
progressive  steps  in  moral  knowledge  and  expe- 
rience, in  order  to  reach,  by  slow  and  laborious  ad- 


ELUCIDATION  BY  HYPOTHESIS.  191 

vancement,  that  moral  perfection  which,  had  man 
obeyed  in  Eden,  he  would  have  attained  by  a 
shorter  and  easier  course. 

It  will  be  observed  that  we  suggest  this  view  as 
an  hypothesis  merely,  consistent  with,  but  not  essen- 
tial to,  our  general  view.  Apart  from  the  objection 
that  it  is  a  mere  hypothesis,  it  involves  the  difficulty, 
or  at  least  the  uncertainty,  of  assuming  that  some 
special  process  is  possible,  whereby  a  creature  could 
be  morally  trained  while  in  a  state  of  moral  igno- 
rance ;  and  the  more  doubtful  conjecture  that  the 
beneficial  effects  of  this  special  training  could  be 
transmitted  by  inheritance  from  our  first  parents 
to  all  their  descendants,  insuring  the  permanent 
holiness  of  all  successive  generations.  It  might 
possibly  be  demonstrated  that  a  divine  training 
which  should  develop  the  Will  of  an  intellectual 
being  in  such  proportion  to  his  other  faculties,  as  to 
make  it  at  once  perfectly  subservient  to  the  Reason, 
and  supreme  over  the  Sensibilities,  would  be  a  suffi- 
cient training  to  insure  moral  perfection  ;  but  would 
the  effects  of  this  special  cultivation  upon  Adam 
naturally  descend,  without  exception  or  deterioration, 
to  all  his  posterity  ?  The  case  of  the  angels  affords 
us  no  light  upon  either  question,  for  we  know  noth- 
ing of  their  moral  history  or  experience,  except 
through  a  supposed  intimation,  (vague  at  best,) 
that  some  have  sinned  and  fallen  ;  and  nothing  of 
their  families  or  generations,  except  that  they 
44  neither  marry  nor  are  given  in  marriage."  The 


192  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

hypothesis  suggests  the  farther  objection,  that  im- 
mortality among  terrestrial  races  would  be  an 
anomaly,  —  decay  and  death  having  been  the  uni- 
versal law  of  Earth  in  all  its  ages.  Yet,  to  this  it 
may  be  replied  that  man,  too,  is  admitted  to  have 
been  created  mortal,  immortality  being  set  before 
him  only  as  a  contingent  possibility.  The  immense 
durations  of  antediluvian  lives  would  seem  to  indi- 
cate that  man's  primitive  organism  must  have  been 
far  more  vigorous  and  enduring  than  now,  requiring 
but  slight  improvement  to  make  it  imperishable ;  and 
although  a  race  of  immortals,  as  they  "  increased 
and  multiplied  and  replenished  the  earth,"  must,  at 
no  distant  period,  have  over-peopled  it,  unless  con- 
stantly removed  by  translation  to  some  other  sphere, 
the  examples  of  Enoch  and  Elijah,  and  perhaps  also 
of  our  Lord  himself,  may  remind  us  that  this  is  not 
an  impossible  supposition. 

While  the  hypothesis  thus  seems  intrinsically  not 
improbable,  and  well  worthy  of  consideration,  there 
will  be  found  in  the  narrative  a  number  of  features 
apparently  tending  to  support  it.  Of  these  we  may 
mention  first,  the  fact  that  Adam,  after  his  creation, 
was  "  taken  and  put "  into  the  garden  of  Eden, 
a  place  specially  planted  and  prepared,  as  if  for 
some  special  purpose  of  education  and  training  con- 
nected with  the  acquisition  of  the  moral  faculty, 
since  the  tree  of  knowledge  is  the  central  feature  in 
his  history  there,  and  he  was  removed  from  the  gar- 
den as  soon  as  the  moral  faculty  was  acquired.  Upon 


ELUCIDATION  BY  HYPOTHESIS.  193 

this  hypothesis  also,  the  presence  of  "  the  tree  of 
life  in  the  midst  of  the  garden,"  which  was  left  ac- 
cessible to  man  until  he  acquired  the  moral  sense 
in  a  mode  that  was  forbidden,  and  was  then  im- 
mediately guarded  from  his  approach,  is  invested 
with  much  significance.  Still  more  noteworthy  is 
the  confirmation  derived  from  the  account  of  the 
temptation  and  its  consequences.  And  again,  in 
the  same  light,  the  malevolence  of  the  tempter,  the 
artfulness  of  his  insinuations,  and  the  folly  of  the 
pair  in  harboring  his  suggestions,  are  strikingly 
exhibited  and  explained.  We  thus  see  the  serpent — 
"  more  subtile  than  any  beast  of  the  field,"  and  for 
centuries  after,  the  symbol  among  Orientals  of  that 
intellectual  subtlety,  that  cunning  sagacity,  which 
the  Eastern  mind  is  apt  to  confound  with  wisdom, — 
addressing  himself  to  the  task  of  inducing  the  pair 
to  disobey  the  mandate  of  their  Maker.  The  nar- 
rative gives  no  hint  of  his  motive,  nor  does  it  inti- 
mate that  beneath  his  reptile  form  was  disguised  a 
higher  intelligence,  an  evil  spirit,  an  enemy  of  God 
and  mankind  ;  yet  it  would  seem  that  such  an  infer- 
ence may  fairly  be  drawn  from  various  circum- 
stances of  the  transaction  ;  —  from  his  interference 
on  the  scene,  from  his  insolent  denial  of  God's  ve- 
racity, and  from  the  curse  which  is  afterwards  de- 
nounced upon  his  head  by  the  Almighty  for  his 
conduct.  Assuming,  then,  the  malice  of  the  tempter, 
we  can  readily  see  what  he  aimed  to  accomplish  by 
inciting  our  first  parents  to  the  untimely  acquisition 

13 


194  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

of  the  moral  faculty.  Seeing  them  to  be  as  yet 
incapable  of  safely  assuming  its  responsibilities,  he 
strove  to  plunge  them  into  it,  expecting  their  ready 
and  helpless  subjection  to  passion  and  sin,  their 
alienation  from  God,  their  ruin  as  a  race  of  moral 
beings,  and  the  utter  failure  of  the  moral  scheme  as 
apparently  formed. 

Had  Adam  and  Eve  been  aware,  or  had  they 
suspected  that  they  were  to  receive  "  the  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil"  by  the  Divine  permission  at  some 
future  time,  it  is  scarcely  conceivable  that  they  would 
have  disobeyed  in  order  to  attain  it  more  speedily. 
But  there  is  no  intimation  that  such  was  the  case, 
and  from  the  prohibition  they  would  probably  draw 
an  opposite  inference.  Yet  this  consideration  hardly 
mitigates  their  rashness  and  folly  in  the  disobedience, 
since  as  intellectual  beings  they  had  capacity  enough 
to  understand  that  their  Maker  might  more  reason- 
ably be  trusted,  and  his  commands  more  safely 
obeyed,  than  the  insinuations  of  an  inferior  or  un- 
known creature.  Not  less  certain  is  it  (under  the 
hypothesis)  that  their  disobedience  was  a  disastrous 
event  to  them  and  the  race  in  its  consequences ;  for 
though  they  by  it  advanced  themselves  a  step  in 
the  scale  of  being,  yet  they  also  lost  by  it  the  in- 
conceivable blessings  and  privileges  by  which  that 
same  step  would  otherwise  have  been  accompanied. 
We  can  easily  understand,  therefore,  how  God, 
while  not  inculpating  them  as  criminally  guilty  in 
the  act,  should  yet  administer  a  just  rebuke  for 


ELUCIDATION  BY  HYPOTHESIS.  195 

their  want  of  confidence  in  him,  and  should  present 
to  their  view  somewhat  in  the  light  of  a  retribution 
the  pains  and  sufferings  which  their  rashness  had 
compelled  him  now  to  impose  as  indispensable  con- 
ditions of  their  existence,  for  the  prevention  of 
their  moral,  mental,  and  physical  ruin.  For  while 
these  pains  and  disabilities  thus  imposed  were,  like 
the  bitter  and  painful  remedies  of  medical  science, 
of  the  highest  benevolence  and  among  the  greatest 
blessings,  and  can  no  more  appropriately  be  denom- 
inated punishments  than  the  prescriptions  of  a  kind 
and  sympathizing  physician,  they  were  yet  in  some 
sense  the  penalty  paid  for  that  inconsiderate  con- 
duct by  which  man  had  brought  upon  himself  a 
feeble  moral  constitution,  instead  of  the  highest 
condition  of  moral  health  and  soundness  which  he 
might  and  would  otherwise  have  enjoyed. 

But  while  God's  sternness  toward  the  human 
pair  is  thus  paternal,  in  a  far  different  tone  is  the 
malevolent  plotter  addressed.  Instead  of  "  cursed 
is  the  ground  for  thy  sake,"  it  is,  —  "  Cursed  art 
ihou  above  every  beast  of  the  field :  upon  thy  belly 
shalt  thou  go,  and  dust  shalt  thou  eat  all  the  days 
of  thy  life  :  and  I  will  put  enmity  between  thee 
and  the  woman,  and  between  thy  seed  and  her 
seed :  it  shall  bruise  thy  head,  and  thou  shalt 
bruise  his  heel."  When  we  observe  (what  Geol- 
ogy teaches)  that  this  curse  worked  no  change  in 
the  serpent  form  or  habits,  its  significance  in  its 
application  to  the  animal  would  seem  to  be  that  a 


196  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

conspicuous  and  perpetual  stigma  should  attach  to 
it,  which  these  natural  characteristics  should  serve 
to  symbolize,  and  so  to  keep  in  remembrance  as  a 
lesson  and  warning  to  mankind.1  It  announces 
that  the  creature  whose  form  and  name  must  be 
forever  associated  with  the  disobedience  in  Paradise 
as  the  prompting  instrument  to  it,  should  remain 
forever  in  the  seeming  debasement  of  its  form  and 
life,  and  in  the  disgust  and  hatred  which  it  should 
inspire,  a  sign  to  man  how  odious  and  despicable  is 
the  subtlety  of  human  wisdom,  when  its  judgments 
and  counsels  are  in  disagreement  with  the  Divine 
monitions.  Or,  if  we  regard  the  serpent  in  this 
transaction  as  the  impersonation  of  an  evil  spirit 
rather  than  of  a  subtle  sagacity,  then  the  sentence 
dooms  the  reptile  thus  forever  marked  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  evil  principle,  to  carry  down  to  all 

1  Some  Biblical  critics  have  found  their  sympathies  moved  in  behalf 
of  the  serpent  family,  on  account  of  this  curse ;  deeming  it  unreason- 
able and  cruel  to  punish  them  for  the  use  of  their  form  without  their 
knowledge  or  consent.  It  may  relieve  such  doubters  somewhat,  to 
notice  that  the  curse  affects  the  creature's  reputation  merely,  as  it  will 
hardly  be  thought  that  this  could  be  a  source  of  much  discomfort  to  a 
brute  creature,  unconscious  of  the  fact,  and  insensible  to  the  ignominy. 
The  force  of  the  expression  "  Cursed  art  thou,"  etc.,  seems  to  be  the 
same  as  in  Jacob's  malediction,.-.-" Cursed  (t.  e.,  detested)  be  their 
wrath,  for  it  was  cruel."  As  to  the  enmity  put  between  the  serpent 
tribes  and  man,  it  was  undoubtedly  real;  but  it  will  be  observed  that 
it  was  to  be  reciprocal.  If  the  animal  was  to  excite  hatred,  it  was  to 
inspire  terror  also, —  and  it  has  thus  been  greatly  protected  from  the 
active  persecution  which  many  other  creatures  have  suffered.  Indeed, 
as  a  mere  brute,  it  would  have  been  far  more  to  be  pitied  had  God 
honored  it  on  this  occasion  by  making  it  thenceforth  man's  favorite 
article  of  food  or  ornament.  The  truth  is,  that  as  the  serpent  form  was 
only  used  as  an  impersonation,  so  it  was  only  cursed  as  a  symbol. 


ELUCIDATION  BY  HYPOTHESIS.  197 

human  generations  the  lesson,  how  detestable  and 
dangerous  evil  is.  The  enmity  which  God  declares 
he  "  will  put "  between  the  serpent  and  man,  must 
be  regarded  as  a  special  instinctive  hostility  that 
would  not  otherwise  have  existed.  As  applied  to 
the  brute  creature,  there  can  be  no  question  that  the 
declaration  has  been  fulfilled ;  but  in  its  deeper 
meaning,  the  plotting  adversary  of  God  and  man 
disguised  beneath  the  serpent  form,  is  shown  how 
completely  his  principal  hope,  the  ruin  of  man  as  a 
moral  being,  was  to  be  baffled  and  to  fail.  The 
language,  in  its  application  to  him,  meant  this :  — 
"  The  human  race  is  not  to  be  thy  unresisting  prey. 
The  moral  faculty  itself,  which  thou  didst  conceive 
of  as  a  mere  intellectual  perception  affixing  but 
not  deterring  from  guilt,  shall  be  a  mighty  force 
exerting  its  influence  within  the  human  breast 
against  thy  sway ;  the  voice  of  conscience  shall  be 
constantly  heard,  inciting  opposition  to  thy  power  ; 
and  though  (as  illustrated  in  the  hostility  to  subsist 
between  the  serpent  race  and  man)  thou  shalt  suc- 
ceed in  working  more  or  less  of  harm  in  the  world, 
yet  '  the  seed  of  the  woman  shall  bruise  thy  head,' 
(by  a  fatal,  incurable  wound,)  while  thou  (in  a 
merely  temporary  and  partial  success)  shalt  only 
'  bruise  his  heel.'  "  In  other  words,  (if  we  adopt 
the  spiritual  sense  so  generally  accorded  to  the  pas- 
sage,) "  A  scheme  of  salvation  shall  be  put  in  oper- 
ation, whereby  a  long  and  doubtful  warfare  between 
man  and  evil  shall  terminate  in  his  deliverance  from 


198  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

sin ;  and  the  final  destruction  of  thy  power  on 
earth  shall  come  to  the  human  race  through  a  fu- 
ture '  SON  OF  MAN,'  —  its  triumphant  Redeemer 
and  Saviour." 

It  is  unnecessary  to  dwell  longer  upon  this  hy- 
pothesis. If  not  susceptible  of  demonstration,  it 
seems  at  least  well  worthy  of  being  attentively 
considered,  and  whatever  of  doubt  or  difficulty 
may  be  thought  to  becloud  it,  may  possibly  be  dis- 
sipated by  a  more  careful  study  or  a  fuller  exami- 
nation. Containing  so  many  marks  of  truth,  and 
having  so  close  a  connection  and  agreement  with 
our  general  view,  we  should  have  been  unwilling 
to  omit  it  from  this  discussion  of  the  narrative, 
even  had  we  been  less  inclined  than  we  are  to 
accept  the  conclusions  which  it  suggests.  We  have 
reserved  it,  however,  from  view,  until  the  true  in- 
terpretation and  import  of  the  narrative  could  be 
shown  to  be  attainable  without  its  aid ;  considering 
(as  already  urged)  that  History  should,  if  possible, 
be  explained  by  its  facts  alone,  and  without  resort 
to  assumptions. 


We  have  thus  gone  carefully  through  the  whole 
of  this  remarkable  narration,  and  can  form  our  own 
opinion  of  its  purport.  If  no  such  teaching  is  con- 
veyed as  we  have  supposed,  it  is  strange  that  our 
view  should  find  such  singular  corroboration,  not 
only  in  the  general  features  of  the  story,  but  even 


ELUCIDATION  BY  HYPOTHESIS.  199 

in  its  minutest  details ;  and  that  all  these  particu- 
lars should  display  such  consistency  with  each  other. 
In  this  respect  we  need  not  fear  to  challenge  for 
our  interpretation  a  comparison  with  that  which 
has  been  heretofore  ordinarily  received,  as  well  as 
in  the  no  less  important  qualities  of  simplicity, 
reasonableness,  and  significance.  Unless  we  are 
much  misled,  also,  it  will  be  found  to  possess  other 
marks  of  truth  in  its  power  of  reconciling  theologi- 
cal diversities  which  spring  from  different  admitted 
and  indisputable,  but  apparently  inconsistent  facts. 
Some  of  these  we  shall  hereafter  briefly  advert  to, 
but  before  we  take  leave  of  the  narrative,  we  must 
notice  one  source  of  probable  objection  to  the  cor- 
rectness of  our  view,  which  is  found  in  another 
portion  of  Scripture. 


200  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  XL 

REVIEW   OF   OBJECTIONS   FROM   THE  FIFTH   CHAPTER 
OF   ROMANS. 

"WHEREFORE,  as  by  one  man  sin  entered  the  world,  and 
death  by  sin,  and  so  death  passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all 
have  sinned ;  (for  until  the  law  sin  was  in  the  world,  but  sin 
is  not  imputed  where  there  is  no  law :  nevertheless  death 
reigned  from  Adam  to  Moses,  even  over  them  who  had  not 
sinned  after  the  similitude  of  Adam's  transgression,  who  is  the 
figure  of  him  that  was  to  come.  But  not  as  the  offence  so  is 
the  free  gift :  for  if  through  the  offence  of  one,  many  be  dead, 
much  more  the  grace  of  God  and  the  gift  by  grace,  which  is 
by  one  man,  Christ  Jesus,  hath  abounded  unto  many.  And 
not  as  it  was  by  one  that  sinned,  so  is  the  gift :  for  the  judg- 
ment was  by  one  to  condemnation ;  but  the  gift  is  of  many 
offences  unto  justification.  For  if  by  one  man's  offence  death 
reigned  by  one,  much  more  they  which  receive  abundance  of 
grace  and  of  the  gift  of  righteousness,  shall  reign  in  life  by 
one,  —  Jesus  Christ.)  Therefore,  as  by  the  offence  of  one, 
judgment  came  upon  all  men  to  condemnation,  even  so  by 
the  righteousness  of  one  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men  to 
justification  of  life.  For  as  by  one  man's  disobedience  many 
were  made  sinners,  so  by  the  obedience  of  one  shall  many  be 
made  righteous."  (Romans  v.  12-19.) 

The  passage  quoted  above,  from  the  fifth  chap- 
ter of  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  is  invariably 
made  the  battle-field  in  controversies  which  turn 
upon  the  history  of  Adam  and  his  relations  to  the 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  201 

race.  Within  it,  as  by  instinct,  theological  belliger- 
ents make  it  their  first  object  to  get  themselves 
securely  intrenched,  persuaded  that  if  once  well 
covered  by  the  advantages  of  that  ground  they  may 
then  safely  undermine,  batter,  and  bombard  the 
strongholds  of  all  adversaries.  Times  innumerable 
has  it  been  the  theatre  of  assault  or  of  sortie,  of 
capture  or  repulse.  Happily,  its  capacity  is  ample 
enough  to  afford  comfortable  accommodations  for 
all ;  and  it  is  accordingly  at  this  day  quietly  occu- 
pied by  at  least  half  a  dozen  diverse  creeds,  each 
of  which,  in  its  particular  quarters,  claims  to  be 
master  of  the  field,  and  glares  self-complacent  de- 
fiance at  the  rest.  And  so,  as  it  is  by  universal 
consent  the  Malakoff  of  Theology,  —  the  key  of 
every  position,  —  we  must,  in  deference  to  the 
established  practice  of  polemic  warfare,  establish 
our  title  to  respect,  by  either  carrying  its  ram- 
parts, or  proving  that  we  are  out  of  the  range  of 
its  fire. 

We  frankly  admit  that  we  question  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  rules  which  declare  this  a  battery  to  be 
spiked  by  every  proffered  theory,  as  a  condition 
of  success.  We  have  great  doubts  whether  it  were 
constructed  by  Paul  as  a  barrier  across  the  road 
toward  truth  ;  we  believe  that  he  rather  intended 
it  as  a  friendly  way-mark,  to  guide  the  inquirer 
along  the  unobstructed  path.  To  drop  the  figure, 
we  cannot  think  that  the  Apostle's  glowing  and 
rhetorical  mind,  when  it  threw  out  this  passage  in 


202  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

the  course  of  his  argument  in  support  of  the  claim 
of  the  Gentiles  to  salvation  as  well  as  the  Jews,  ever 
designed  it  as  a  precise  and  definite  formula  of 
dogmatic  belief,  in  all  its  parts  and  expressions. 
We  do  not  believe  that  it  was  ever  written  for 
analysis  in  theological  alembics  by  the  microscopic 
scrutiny  of  syllables,  or  the  mathematically  accurate 
weighing  of  significations,  in  order  to  detect  the 
measures  of  doctrinal  equivalents.  It  is  simply  an 
illustration  with  which  he  closes  an  argument,  and 
exhibits  its  bearing;  and  it  is  to  be  held  to  no 
greater  precision  of  terms  than  will  suffice  for  illus- 
tration, and  extended  to  no  farther  reach  of  doc- 
trine than  is  sought  to  be  enforced  by  the  argu- 
ment. 

The  point  of  these  remarks  becomes  manifest 
when,  upon  a  careful  inspection  of  the  passage,  we 
find  that  there  is  nothing  whatever  in  its  main  idea 
that  conflicts  with  the  view  contained  in  the  fore- 
going pages.  That  Adam,  in  his  relations  to  man- 
kind, was  the  type  of  Christ  in  his  relations  to  man- 
kind ;  —  that  as,  through  the  disobedience  of  the 
one,  universal  sinfulness  and  universal  mortality 
were  brought  into  the  world  and  passed  upon  the 
Gentiles  as  well  as  the  Jews,  so,  through  the  obedi- 
ence of  the  other,  universal  righteousness  and  uni- 
versal life  are  offered  to  the  world,  to  Gentiles  as 
well  as  to  Jews,  —  this,  which  is  all  that  the  Apostle 
has  sought  to  establish  in  his  preceding  argument, 
and  hence  all  that  he  has  designed  to  illustrate  in 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  203 

this  comparison,  is  completely  accordant  with,  and 
sustained  by,  the  view  we  have  presented.  The 
only  possible  discrepancy  which  can  be  made  to 
appear  between  this  passage  and  our  theory  is 
found  in  the  terms  "  sinning"  (d^apTTyo-an-os)  and 
*'  offence  "(TrapaTn-wjua  —  literally,  "  a  falling  away  "), 
which  are  here  apparently  applied  by  Paul  to  the 
first  disobedience  of  Adam,  as  if  he  regarded  that 
act  as  characterized  by  moral  guilt. 

With  regard  to  these  expressions,  however,  we 
insist  that  they  are  to  be  considered  as  incidental 
expressions  merely,  not  committing  the  writer  to 
any  particular  view  of  the  transaction  to  which  they 
are  applied,  but  casually  used  by  him  as  words 
ordinarily  employed  to  designate  it,  unless  they  can 
be  shown  to  have  been  derived  from  his  previous 
argument  as  an  essential  feature  of  the  inferences 
therefrom.  In  other  words,  the  illustration  must 
not  be  pushed  as  a  proof  of  doctrine  further  than 
the  reasoning  which  it  was  merely  intended  to  illus- 
trate. Now  Paul  announces  this  passage,  as  the 
sum  and  result  of  his  previous  argument.  "  Where- 
fore," he  says,  i.  e.,  "  To  sum  up  what  we  have 
before  shown,  the  argument  may  be  briefly  ex- 
hibited in  the  following  comparison."  In  order, 
therefore,  to  fix  the  precise  limit  of  the  principles  or 
doctrines  to  which  he  intends  to  commit  himself  in 
the  comparison,  we  must  go  back  to  the  beginning 
and  follow  the  course  of  his  argument,  that  we  may 
remark  the  particular  doctrines  there  set  forth 


204  THE  RISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

which  he  is  here  attempting  comprehensively  to  re- 
state and  illustrate. 

What  then  are  the  drift  and  scope  of  the  preced- 
ing portions  of  this  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  how 
far  do  they  bear  upon  this  reference  to  Adam  ? 
More  especially  is  the  disobedience  of  Adam,  as  an 
action  having  a  moral  aspect,  so  far  discussed  or 
made  use  of  as  to  render  the  designation  of  "  sin," 
here  applied  to  it,  essential  to  the  argument  ?  Let 
us  examine  it  and  see. 

If  we  go  back  to  ch.  i.  v.  16,  we  shall  there  find 
Paul  announcing,  at  the  outset,  the  theme  of  the 
whole  discussion,  namely,  —  that  "  the  Gospel  of 
Christ  is  the  power  of  salvation  to  every  one  that 
believeth,  to  the  Jew  first,  and  also  to  the  Gen- 
tile." From  this  point,  anticipating  the  hostility 
which  the  declaration  of  this  universality  of  the 
Gospel  would  encounter  from  Jewish  bigotry,  he 
proceeds  in  the  support  of  its  truth  by  arguments 
from  reason,  from  Scripture,  and  from  the  estab- 
lished course  of  God's  dealings  with  men. 

He  reminds  his  opponents,  as  the  groundwork 
of  his  reasoning,  of  the  admitted  application  of 
God's  moral  system  to  the  whole  human  race.  He 
shows  them  that  all  men,  without  exception,  the 
Jew  as  well  as  the  Gentile,  are  all  gone  astray  from 
moral  rectitude,  and  are  all  alike  punished  for  their 
sins.  And  while  all  alike  share  in  the  responsibili- 
ties of  the  moral  law,  shall  they  not,  he  inquires, 
be  admitted  to  its  privileges  also  ?  *'  Yes,"  he  re- 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  205 

plies  (ch.  ii.  6—16),  "  He  who  renders  unto  every 
man  according  to  his  deeds,  —  tribulation  and  an- 
guish to  the  unrighteous,  to  the  Jew  as  well  as  the 
Gentile,  —  He  also  confers  glory,  honor,  and  peace 
upon  him  that  worketh  good,  to  the  Gentile  as  well 
as  the  Jew."  It  is  not  the  mere  accident  of  nation- 
ality that  makes  men  differ  in  his  sight.  "  For  not 
the  hearer  of  the  law,  (the  Hebrew,)  but  the  doers 
of  the  law,  (of  all  races,)  are  justified  before  God." 
*'  Do  you  think,"  he  continues,  "  that  because  you 
happen  to  be  a  Jew,  with  the  law  and  the  cir- 
cumcision, that  you  can  therefore  lead  an  unholy 
life  with  any  more  security  than  the  Gentile  who 
has  not  these  outward  tokens  ?  Is  it  being  a 
Jew,  then,  which  is  to  purchase  special  favor  from 
God  ?  If  so,  be  assured  that  he  is  not  the  Jew, 
in  God's  estimation,  who  is  one  outwardly,  but  he 
who  is  one  in  the  spirit ;  and  such  an  one  shall  be 
accepted  by  Him,  of  whatever  lineage  or  origin." 

Pursuing  this  idea  in  the  next  chapter  (ch.  in.), 
Paul  examines  the  real  advantages  which  the  Jews 
possessed  over  the  Gentiles,  showing  that  they  con- 
sisted merely  in  national  blessings  and  privileges, 
(such  as  that  "  unto  them  were  committed  the  ora- 
cles of  God,")  and  not  in  any  different  rights  or  lia- 
bilities as  subjects  of  the  moral  law.  He  shows  that 
they  have  merited  no  special  favors  under  the  law, 
having  been  equally  corrupt  with  the  Gentiles ;  and 
concludes  that  in  this  respect,  therefore,  they  have 
no  reason  for  boasting  or  expectation  of  preference 


206  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

in  the  impartial  administration  of  the  Divine  gov- 
ernment, since  "  God  is  the  God  of  the  Gentiles,  as 
well  as  of  the  Jews." 

"  But,"  it  would  be  asked  by  the  Hebrew  ob- 
jector, "  was  not  a  covenant  made  with  Abraham  for 
himself  and  his  seed  after  him  ?  "  "  Undoubtedly," 
responds  the  Apostle  ;  and  he  now  refers  to  this 
very  fact  as  a  farther  proof  that  the  reward  of  faith 
shall  come  to  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  the  Jews.  He 
adverts  to  the  important  fact  (ch.  iv.  10),  that  the 
faith,  on  account  of  which  this  covenant  was  made, 
"  was  reckoned  unto  Abraham  for  righteousness 
while  he  was  yet  uncircumcised ; "  and  from  it  he 
draws  the  conclusion  that  Abraham,  "  the  father  of 
the  faithful,"  thereby  became  and  was  recognized 
as  the  father  of  the  uncircumcised  faithful,  no  less 
than  of  such  as  were  his  lineal  descendants ,  "  for 
the  promise  (v.  13)  was  not  to  Abraham  or  his  seed 
through  the  [Jewish]  law,  but  through  the  right- 
eousness of  faith."  It  applies,  therefore,  not  merely 
to  his  natural  posterity,  but  to  all  "  out  of  many 
nations,"  who  shall  imitate  the  faith  of  Abraham ; 
that  is,  (v.  24,)  "  who  shall  believe  on  Him  that 
hath  raised  up  Jesus  our  Lord  from  the  dead." 

Then,  after  a  short  discursive  allusion  to  the 
ground  and  the  joy  of  faith  in  Christ,  having  ar- 
rived at  the  point  for  which  he  set  out,  he  looks 
back,  and  reviewing  the  path  he  has  gone  over,  he 
sums  up  the  effect  of  the  whole  argument  by  declar- 
ing it  proved  that  the  "  Gospel  of  Christ,"  like  the 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  £07 

moral  system  itself,  is  universal,  both  in  its  respon- 
sibilities and  privileges.  "  Wherefore,"  (i.  e,,  as 
the  result  and  the  illustration  of  the  foregoing,)  "  as 
by  one  man  sin  entered  into  the  world,  and  death 
by  sin,  and  so  death  passed  upon  all  men  for  that  all 
have  sinned," —  in  other  words,  (v.  18,)  "  as  by  the 
offence  of  one,  judgment  came  upon  all  men  to  con- 
demnation, so  by  the  righteousness  of  one,  the  free 
gift  came  upon  all  men,  unto  justification  of  life." 

From  this  review,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  moral 
character  of  Adam's  act,  so  far  from  being  relied 
upon  as  a  material  part  of  Paul's  previous  argument, 
was  not  even  alluded  to  in  it,  however  distantly, 
nor  is  there  any  portion  of  that  argument  upon 
which  it  can  have  the  remotest  bearing  or  influence. 
In  its  light  we  see  at  once,  that  Paul's  object  in  this 
passage,  as  well  as  in  the  whole  discussion,  is  not  to 
define  the  character  of  Adam's  transgression,  (such 
an  idea  never  entered  his  mind  ;)  but  to  exhibit  the 
wide  application  of  the  office  of  Christ.  For  this 
purpose  he  here  refers  to  Adam's  disobedience  with 
sole  reference  to  the  universality  of  its  effect,  using 
this  both  as  an  illustration  of,  and  an  argument  for, 
the  universality  of  Christ's  remedial  dispensation.  It 
could  make  no  difference  for  this  purpose,  whether 
the  common  idea  that  Adam's  act  was  a  sin  were 
correct  or  not,  and  although  he  calls  it  "  an  offence," 
casually  adopting  the  common  expression  and  idea 
respecting  it,  yet,  inasmuch  as  this  designation  is 
entirely  outside  of  his  previous  train  of  thought  and 


208  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

argument,  it  must  be  regarded  as  "  obiter  dictum" 
and  not  an  authoritative  declaration  of  its  true  char- 
acter. 

"  But,"  it  will  be  urged,  "  does  not  this  destroy 
much  of  the  force  of  the  passage,  which  is  plainly 
*  judicial '  in  its  character  ?  It  speaks  of '  condemn- 
ing '  and  '  acquitting,' l  and  how  can  there  be  con- 
demnation except  for  sin  ?  Is  not  the  idea  of  sin, 
therefore,  an  essential  part  of  the  contrast  insti- 
tuted ?  "  Let  it  be  admitted  in  reply,  that  the  pas- 
sage is  judicial  in  spirit,  and  that  the  condemnation 
spoken  of  is  for  sin.  Of  what  sin,  and  whose,  does 
the  Apostle  declare  it  to  be  the  judgment  ?  Observe 
it  is  the  condemnation  of  all  mankind  that  he  speaks 
of,  —  the  single  topic  of  all  his  previous  discussion  ; 
—  and  although  he  here  alludes  to  Adam's  act  as 
introducing  this  condemnation,  he  directly  declares, 
both  in  this  passage  and  in  the  outset  of  his  argu- 
ment, that  it  so  comes  on  all  mankind,  not  for 
Adam's  act,  but  because  "  all  have  sinned."  We  do 
not  here  examine  at  length,  the  claim,  supported 
in  "  The  Conflict  of  Ages,"  that  in  this  place,  the 
expression  "  all  have  sinned  "  should  be  translated 
"  all  have  been  treated  as  sinners " ;  and  so  the 
whole  phrase  read,  —  "  Death  passed  upon  all  men, 
for  that  all  were  treated  as  sinners,"  %.  e.,  "  All  were 
treated  as  sinners,  because  all  were  treated  as  sin- 
ners," or,  perhaps,  "  because  all  were  regarded  as 
sinners."  We  think  it  unnecessary  to  dilate  upon  it, 

l  Conflict  of  Ages,  p.  397. 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  209 

for  according  to  the  one  mode  of  reading,  it  is  mere 
nonsense,  and  according  to  the  other,  it  simply 
comes  back  to  the  present  translation,  "  because  all 
have  sinned"  Besides,  the  true  sense  of  the  phrase 
is  to  be  found  not  merely  by  scrutinizing  it  by  itself, 
but  by  referring  to  the  argument  with  which  it  is 
connected.  It  is  the  restatement  of  that  which 
constitutes  the  basis  and  foundation  of  Paul's  whole 
argument,  as  will  be  seen  by  consulting  the  pre- 
vious chapters,  wherein  he  sets  out  by  showing  the 
sinfulness  of  all  men  as  the  reason  of  God's  judg- 
ments. Thus,  (ch.  i.  10,)  "  For  the  wrath  of  God 
is  revealed  from  heaven  against  all  ungodliness  and 
unrighteousness  of  men,"  of  whom  (ch.  ii.  9)  "  We 
have  before  proved  [or  4  charged ']  that  they  are  all 
under  sin,  as  it  is  written,  '  There  is  none  righteous, 
no,  not  one.'  "  In  all  this  there  is  not  the  slightest 
reference  to  the  sin  of  Adam  as  the  ground  of  the 
condemnation  of  the  race,  but,  on  the  contrary,  there 
are  plain  intimations,  in  almost  every  verse,  that 
[notwithstanding  Adam's  act]  had  men  been  them- 
selves righteous,  they  would  have  been  justified.  If 
it  is  true,  then,  as  asserted  by  some,  that  in  this  par- 
ticular passage  "  the  sin  of  Adam,  and  not  their 
own  actual  transgression,  is  given  as  the  ground  and 
reason  of  the  subjection  of  all  men  to  the  penal 
evils  spoken  of," l  then  it  is  in  direct  variance  and 
opposition  to  the  whole  of  the  preceding  argu- 
ment, both  in  its  letter  and  its  spirit,  a  circumstance 

l  Professor  Hodge,  quoted  in  Conflict  of  Ago,  p.  406. 
14 


210  THE  RISE  AND   THE   FALL. 

which  should  cause  such  a  view  to  be  received  with 
some  hesitation. 

What  Paul  attempts  in  the  argument  is  the  ex- 
position of  two  great  systems  in  the  moral  govern- 
ment of  God.  The  first,  a  system  (without  refer- 
ence to  the  mode  of  its  origination)  of  condemna- 
tion upon  all  who  have  violated  the  moral  law,  i.  e., 
upon  all  men,  "  for  that  all  have  sinned,  and  come 
short  of  the  glory  of  God,"  (ch.  iii.  23,)  (i.  e., 
"  failed  to  illustrate  his  holiness.")  The  other,  a 
system  of  justification  through  "  faith  of  Jesus 
Christ,  unto  all,  and  upon  all  them  that  believe," 
(ch.  iii.  22.)  Having  set  forth  these  systems  in  the 
preceding  chapters,  he  now,  in  this  summary  of 
what  has  gone  before,  contrasts  them ;  the  system 
of  judgment,  as  having  been  introduced  or  originated 
by  the  disobedience  of  Adam,  our  natural  head, 
with  the  system  of  justification,  as  having  been  in- 
troduced or  originated  by  the  obedience  of  Christ, 
our  spiritual  head.  We  may  admit,  if  we  please, 
that  he  makes  "  the  sequence  of  justification  and 
life  from  the  obedience  of  Christ,  a  sequence  in 
which  there  is  a  real  and  glorious  causative  power"; l 
but  it  is  certain  that  he  sets  up  no  such  causation 
and  effect  between  the  act  of  Adam  and  the  con- 
demnation of  men,  so,  at  least,  as  to  teach  that  the 
latter  was  a  punishment  for  the  former.  But  if 
Paul  does  not  mean  that  this  "judgment"  upon 
men  was  in  consequence  of  any  guilt  in  Adam's 

i  Conflict  of  Ayes,  p.  375. 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  211 

act,  then  the  question  of  guilt  or  not  in  that  act 
does  not  enter  into  the  spirit  of  the  passage,  and 
his  use  of  the  word  "sin,"  in  reference  to  the  act 
of  Adam,  is  not  essential  to  the  force  of  the  contrast, 
or  to  the  judicial  interpretation  of  the  passage. 

The  substance  of  the  foregoing  argument  is  this : 
That  so  far  as  Paul  contrasts  the  act  of  Adam 
with  the  acts  of  Christ  (in  distinction  from  the 
effects  of  the  acts  in  the  two  cases  respectively), 
this  is  incidental  to  the  main  course  of  thought,  and 
should  be  interpreted  as  referring  to  their  outward 
semblance,  and  not  to  their  internal  character.  We 
may  present  some  considerations,  however,  upon  a 
a  different  ground,  which  will  bring  us  to  the  same 
conclusion. 

Paul  in  this  passage  is  using  Adam  and  his  act 
simply  as  an  antithetical  type  of  Christ  and  his  acts. 
Adam,  at  the  head  of  his  system  of  "  sinfulness  and 
condemnation,"  appears  the  counterpart  or  anti- 
thesis of  Christ,  at  the  head  of  his  system  of  holi- 
ness and  life.  Adam's  act  of  transgression  inaugu- 
rating the  one,  is  the  antithesis  of  Christ's  acts 
of  obedience  inaugurating  the  other.  As  a  type, 
therefore,  the  correspondence  in  the  external  as- 
pects of  the  two  sets  of  facts  was  sufficiently  exact, 
and  it  was  not  necessary  that  their  internal 
character  should  be  in  precisely  corresponding  con- 
trast. In  facts  or  events  merely  types,  established 
for  illustration  simply,  such  exact  correspondence  is 
not  required  or  expected.  Thus,  the  sacrifices  of 


212  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

lambs  and  goats  typifying  the  death  of  Christ, 
neither  in  the  moral  nature  of  the  victims,  nor  in 
the  manner  of  their  death,  exhibited  to  that  great 
event  the  slightest  resemblance.  Accordingly,  Paul 
here  using  Adam's  transgression  merely  as  an  anti- 
thetical type  of  Christ's  holy  obedience,  could  have 
designed  no  other  reference  than  simply  to  its  ex- 
ternal aspect,  and  to  that  only  so  far  as  in  its 
general  form  it  presented  a  typical  illustration. 
Hence  he  should  not  be  understood  as  expressing  an 
opinion  upon  the  real  internal  character  of  the  act 
when  he  calls  it  Adam's  "  sin,"  or  "  offence  "  ;  but 
simply  as  calling  it  a  sin  because  in  its  circum- 
stances it  resembled  one  sufficiently  to  be  an  anti- 
thetical type  of  Christ's  holiness.  Nay,  we  go 
farther.  If  we  suppose  Paul  himself  to  have  be- 
lieved this  act  of  Adam's  to  have  been  a  sin,  even 
that  will  not  make  his  entitling  it  so  in  this  place 
authoritative  on  that  point.  For  though  we  must 
suppose  that  Inspiration  dictated  his  reference  to 
the  act  as  a  type  in  this  case,  still  Inspiration  sanc- 
tions and  invests  it  only  so  far  as  it  is  presented  as 
a  type,  and  does  not  authoritatively  fix  its  character 
any  farther.  In  other  words,  a  statement  or  illus- 
tration may  be  inspired  to  a  certain  degree,  and  be 
true  to  that  degree,  but  be  untrue,  or  at  least  not 
authoritative,  beyond  that  particular  point,  even 
though  put  forth  in  good  faith  as  a  broad  truth  by 
the  writer.  To  illustrate.  We  have  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  Paul  knew  of  the  perished  races  an- 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  213 

tenor  to  man,  —  the  history  of  these  having  been 
but  recently  brought  to  light  by  Geology.  We  can 
therefore  have  no  doubt  that  when  he  wrote  that 
"  death  came  into  the  world  by  sin,"  he  supposed 
that  fact  was  true  in  its  widest  acceptation.  Thus 
indeed  have  all  theologians  believed  up  to  a  very 
recent  date,  and  have  doubtless  considered  this 
declaration  of  Paul  as  inspired  truth  to  the  full 
extent  of  its  broadest  meaning.1  But  since  we  have 
learned  that  the  statement  is  true  only  in  its  appli- 
cation to  man,  we  perceive  that,  although  inspired 
and  true  to  the  extent  necessary  for  illustration  of 
the  subject  in  hand,  it  is  not  so  beyond  that  limit, 
even  though  Paul  himself  may  have  considered  it 
entirely  true  as  broadly  as  written. 

Wherever,  in  fact,  we  meet  with  expressions  used 
in  connection  with  types,  we  are  to  receive  them 
simply  as  illustrations,  the  precise  accuracy  of 
which  is  not  manifest  on  their  face,  but  subject 
to  be  ascertained  from  other  sources.  We  may 
well  accept  the  term  "  offence,"  or  "  sin,"  as 
properly  applicable  to  Adam's  act  for  the  purposes 
of  typical  allusion;  but  to  ascertain  how  far  it 
was  really  a  sin,  or  offence,  when  committed,  we 
must  go  to  the  original  story,  —  the  same  and  the 
only  source  from  which  Paul  himself  derived  his 
impressions  of  it.  For  the  purpose  for  which  he 
needed  it,  he  was  not  called  upon  to  examine  its 

l  Thus  Dr.  Dwight  says,  Theol,  Vol.  I.  424:  "  Until  the  fall,  death 
was  a  total  stranger  to  Creation ;  and  but  for  that  event,  all  animals,  as 
well  as  man,  would  have  been  immortal." 


214  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

internal  nature,  and  so  just  glanced  at  the  facts  in 
the  light  in  which  they  were  commonly  presented. 
We,  on  the  other  hand,  have  been  called  upon  to 
examine  that  internal  nature,  and  having  so  done, 
have  a  right  to  form  our  own  opinion  respecting  it. 
It  would  be  no  more  just  then,  to  insist  that  the 
literal  and  extreme  sense  of  apapT-ya-avros  (sinning), 
thus  incidentally  and  typically  used  in  reference 
to  this  act,  is  an  inspired  declaration  of  its  real 
character,  than  to  maintain  that  the  Apostle's  state- 
ment that  "  death  entered  into  the  world  by  sin " 
was  meant  to  deny  and  disprove  the  records  of 
Geology ;  or  that  his  declaration  (in  Heb.  xi.  17) 
that  "  Abraham  offered  up  Isaac,"  is  of  greater 
weight  than  the  account  of  that  transaction  in 
Genesis.  The  truth  is  that  these  expressions  in 
each  instance,  coming  in  incidentally,  and  for  an- 
other purpose,  are  to  be  taken  as  rhetorical  ex- 
pressions merely,  and  not  as  the  infallible  announce- 
ments of  inspiration. 

Under  such  circumstances,  looking  entirely  to 
the  enforcement  of  his  central  idea,  the  Apostle 
would  naturally  refer  to  Adam's  act  in  the  terms 
most  familiar  to  himself  and  his  readers,  just  as  he 
might  use  an  illustration  from  classic  fable,  or  an 
unscientific  but  common  view  of  natural  phenomena, 
without  pausing  to  satisfy  himself  of  the  reality  of 
the  supposed  facts,  and  certainly  without  stamping 
them  with  divine  authority  for  their  truth  and  ac- 
curacy. Thus  Christ  himself,  in  remonstrating  with 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  215 

the  Pharisees  for  their  unbelief,  demanded,  "  If  I 
by  Beelzebub  cast  out  devils,  by  whom  do  your 
children  cast  them  out  ?  "  where  it  is  not  probable 
that  he  meant  to  admit  the  incantations  and  charms 
of  the  Jewish  sorcerers  to  be  efficacious  for  genuine 
cures.  So  Jude  says,  "  Yet  Michael  the  archangel, 
when  contending  with  the  devil  he  disputed  about 
the  body  of  Moses,"  referring  to  an  old  fable  or 
tradition  as  an  illustration,  without  asserting  its 
truth.  And  Paul  himself  (Heb.  xi.  13),  speaking 
of  the  patriarchs  previously  enumerated,  says, 
"  These  all  died  in  faith,"  though  of  one  of  them 
(Enoch)  he  had  just  declared  that  he  did  not  die, 
but  "  was  translated  that  he  should  not  see  death." 
It  was  not  the  practice  of  Christ  or  his  apostles  to 
combat  the  settled  doctrinal  notions  of  the  Jews, 
when  these  did  not  affect  the  vital  truths  of  Chris- 
tianity, or  interfere  with  practical  holiness  of  life. 
It  was  not  their  purpose  to  teach  dogma,  but  to 
preach  righteousness.  Hence  merely  controversial 
inquiries,  when  addressed  to  them,  they  uniformly 
evaded.  In  the  same  spirit  they  observed  and  rec- 
ommended compliance  with  ceremonial  usages  and 
other  matters,  which  they  yet  regarded  as  indif- 
ferent, or  even  abrogated  by  the  new  dispensation. 
There  is  therefore  no  reason  to  suppose  that  Inspi- 
ration would  have  checked  any  adoption  and  applica- 
tion by  Paul  of  the  common  view  of  Adam's  diso- 
bedience for  the  purposes  of  typical  illustration  ;  or 
would  have  corrected  in  his  mind  any  erroneous 


216  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

impressions  with  regard  to  it,  which  he  might  have 
received  from  his  Jewish  education,  so  long  as  that 
correction  was  not  requisite  to  affect  the  reality  and 
truth  of  the  type,  or  to  promote  the  efficient  preach- 
ing of  the  Gospel.  Paul  had  much  fuller  and  more 
just  perceptions  of  the  scope  and  bearing  of  Chris- 
tianity than  some  of  the  other  apostles,  equally 
inspired,  and  this  difference  of  views  at  times  gave 
rise  to  divisions  of  opinion  among  them ;  yet  doubt- 
less there  were  many  truths  relating  to  God's  gov- 
ernment of  which  he,  no  less  than  the  rest  of  man- 
kind, entertained  ideas  obscure  or  tinctured  with 
error.  The  time  had  not  yet  come  for  these  to  be 
clearly  revealed.1 

1  The  foregoing  remarks  suppose  the  Apostle  in  this  passage  to  refer 
distinctly  to  Adam's  act  of  disobedience  as  a  simple  and  complete  fact 
in  itself.  We  would  suggest,  however,  that  his  argument  may  be 
looked  at  from  another  point  of  view,  which  may  be  stated  as  fol- 
lows :  — 

Paul  presents  the  act  of  Adam  as  he  presents  the  act  of  Christ,  — 
each  in  the  light  of  its  consequences  in  their  individual  characters.  He 
looked  in  his  own  mind  upon  the  disobedience  of  Adam  with  its  at- 
tendant result  of  sinfulness  in  him  (not  separating  the  act  from  the 
character  that  followed  the  act,  and  speaking  of  "  the  offence  "  of  Adam 
as  a  figure  for  the  sinfulness  in  him  which  it  introduced),  just  as  he 
refers  to  "  the  obedience  "  of  Christ  and  his  consequent  righteousness, 
without  meaning  to  allude  to  any  or  all  of  the  specific  acts  which  made 
up  his  obedience. 

The  central  and  main  idea  is  the  parallelism  of  the  justification 
by  Christ  in  respect  to  its  consequence  on  man,  with  the  disobedience 
and  sinfulness  introduced  by  Adam  in  reference  to  their  consequence. 
The  first  is  broadly  stated,  without  exhibiting  the  contents  of  this  jus- 
tification or  the  mode  of  its  consequence ;  so  also  the  disobedience  of 
Adam  and  its  results  to  him  and  the  race  are  stated  with  corresponding 
breadth.  These  two  parallel  sets  of  facts  (and  not  their  analytic  con- 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  217 

Having  thus  asserted  our  claim  that  too  much 
stress  is  not  to  be  laid  as  authority  upon  the  desig- 
nations applied  by  Paul  to  Adam's  act  and  its 
effects,  in  contrast  with  and  as  a  type  of  the 
acts  of  Christ  and  their  effects,  it  remains  for  us 
to  show  that  the  adoption  of  the  view  which  we 
have  urged  by  no  means  destroys  the  force  or 
value  of  Adam  as  a  type  of  the  Messiah,  but 
rather  enhances  it.  In  the  first  place,  it  does  not 
impair  that  value.  For  though  it  sets  aside  the 
literal  sense  in  which  his  act  may  contrast  as  a  sin, 
with  the  holiness  of  Christ,  it  still  leaves  the  con- 
trast perfect  in  a  typical,  or  illustrative  sense. 
Obedience  is  still  set  in  opposition  with  disobedi- 
ence, and  righteousness  with  an  act  of  transgres- 
sion so  nearly  resembling  sin  as  to  answer  every 
purpose  of  a  typical  antithesis.  But  besides  the 
correspondence  in  this  respect,  and  in  respect  to  the 
universality  of  the  two  dispensations,  and  in  respect 
to  their  opposite  character  (the  only  particulars  in 
which  the  Apostle  suggests  a  comparison),  the  com- 
pleteness of  the  parallel  is  farther  extended  by  our 
.view  in  several  important  particulars. 

For  not  only  does  it  satisfy  St.  Paul's  declaration 
that  Adam's  act  inaugurated  a  system  of  universal 
condemnation,  just  as  Christ  laid  open  one  of  uni- 

tents)  it  was,  that  formed  in  the  Apostle's  mind  the  analogical  argu- 
ment of  parallelism  which  he  here  employs ;  leaving  the  reader  to  refer 
on  the  one  hand  to  the  Gospel  for  the  particulars,  and  on  the  other  to 
the  account  of  Adam  and  his  disobedience  for  farther  light;  presenting 
both,  therefore,  as  subjects  for  investigation  and  study. 


218  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

versal  (i.  e.,  free)  salvation,  but  it  also  shows  a 
parallelism  in  the  mode  of  the  effects  of  each  upon 
men.  It  justifies  in  an  especial  manner  the  Apostle's 
statement  that,  "  As  by  one  man  many  were  made 
sinners,  even  so,  by  one  shall  many  be  made  right- 
eous." How  then  is  it  that  men  are  "  made  sin- 
ners "  (or  "  come  to  be  regarded  as  sinners,"  if 
that  is  a  better  translation)  through  Adam's  act, 
and  how  does  it  appear  to  be  the  same  way  as  that 
in  which  "  many  are  made  righteous  "  (or  "  come 
to  be  considered  and  treated  as  righteous  ")  through 
the  agency  of  Christ  ?  Not,  in  either  case,  by  an 
inevitable  infusion  into  the  race  or  the  individual, 
and  without  its  cooperation,  immediately  upon  and 
by  virtue  of  the  obedience  or  disobedience,  (as  the 
case  may  be,)  of  guilt  or  holiness  respectively,  or 
of  new  tendencies  toward  guilt  or  holiness.  Had 
Adam  been  a  holy  being  and  lost  that  holiness  both 
for  himself  and  his  posterity  by  an  act  of  sin,  as 
the  ordinary  view  teaches,  so  that  by  and  through 
that  act  he  and  they  thenceforward  became  inevi- 
tably sinful,  then  it  must  have  been  that  immedi- 
ately upon  that  act  and  by  it,  some  change  for  the 
worse  was  wrought  in  the  constitution  of  the  race. 
Were  Christ's  influence,  then,  the  exact  antithesis 
of  this,  it  would  follow  that  immediately  upon  his 
obedience  and  by  it,  some  change  was  wrought  for 
the  better  in  the  constitution  of  the  race.  But 
this,  as  we  all  know,  is  not  the  manner  in  which 
Christ's  righteousness  affects  the  condition  of  man- 


THE  FIFTH  CHAPTER  OF  ROMANS.  219 

kind.  Man  is  not  made  the  subject  of  God's  grace 
involuntarily,  although  he  is,  without  his  agency, 
admitted  to  the  opportunities  of  its  benefits.  So, 
on  the  other  hand,  our  view  shows  us  that  he  does 
not  partake  of  the  evil  effects  of  Adam's  act  invol- 
untarily, although  he  is,  without  his  own  agency, 
made  a  moral  being  by  it,  and  so  exposed  to  the 
opportunity  of  being  affected  by  them.  Christ's 
work,  it  is  agreed,  in  itself  alone  and  without  ref- 
erence to  its  acceptance  by  man,  affected  the  moral 
position  of  the  race  only  by  the  new  opportunities 
of  holiness  and  pardon  which  it  introduced.  So, 
by  our  view,  Adam's  act,  in  itself  alone  and  with- 
out reference  to  the  actions  of  men  as  moral  agents 
under  it,  influenced  the  moral  position  of  his  pos- 
terity only  by  making  guilt  a  possibility  for  them. 
Christ  only  removed  the  impediments  to  men's  sal- 
vation. Adam,  according  to  our  view,  did  nothing 
more  than  open  the  way  to  moral  ruin.  Thus,  in 
short,  (as  we  say,)  Adam  made  men  capable  of  be- 
coming sinners,  and  left  it  for  them  to  adopt  the 
character,  or  to  remain  holy  if  they  would  ;  just  as 
Christ  opens  to  them  the  opportunity  of  becoming 
righteous,  but  leaves  it  dependent  upon  themselves 
to  embrace  it :  "  To  as  many  as  received  him,  to 
them  gave  he  the  power  (e£owtav,  the  faculty  or 
privilege)  to  become  the  sons  of  God."  (John  i.  12.) 
In  respect  to  the  actual  moral  situations  and  rela- 
tions which  ensued  to  the  race  as  historic  facts,  in 
the  two  cases  respectively,  we  find  the  Apostle's 


220  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

presentation  of  the  parallel  sustained  by  our  view. 
For  as  the  actual  result  of  Adam's  act  was,  that  in 
consequence  of  it  the  race  did  voluntarily  lapse 
into  a  sinful  and  lost  condition,  entailing  punish- 
ment, so,  on  the  other  hand,  the  mission  of  Christ 
has  had,  and  will  have  for  its  actual  effect  the  salva- 
tion of  believers,  and  finally  the  whole  race,  from 
this  unhappy  state  of  sin  and  peril.  It  appears, 
then,  that  though  men's  natures  were  by  Adam's 
act,  in  itself  considered,  enlarged  and  exalted,  yet, 
as  the  result  of  their  own  course  in  consequence 
of  it,  they  have  fallen  from  moral  innocence  into 
guilt  and  condemnation.  In  this  respect,  there- 
fore, it  may  be  said  that  the  result  and  effect  of 
Adam's  act  have  been  disastrous  to  the  race.  Christ's 
work,  however,  can  have  no  such  unhappy  though 
indirect  consequence.  For  while  faith  in  Him 
strengthens  and  ennobles  human  nature  for  its  con- 
test with  sin,  it  also  relieves  the  soul  from  the  peril 
impending  over  its  safety.  Thus  "if  through  the 
offence  (transgression)  of  one,  many  be  dead,  much 
more  the  grace  of  God,  and  the  gift  by  grace,  hath 
abounded  unto  many."  Or,  to  adopt  the  other 
words  of  the  Apostle,  "As  by  the  offence  (diso- 
bedience) of  one  [it  resulted]  unto  all  men  to  con- 
demnation, even  so,  by  the  righteousness  of  one  [it 
resulted]  unto  all  men  to  justification  of  life."  1 

1  "We  follow  the  literal  reading  of  the  text,  v.  18 :  "Apa  ovv  ws  Si1  evos 

irapeurTuifAaTOS  ei«  irofTa?  avBptairovs  eis  KaToKpiAia:  ovria  KOJ.  Si'  ecbs  Sucai- 
<i/btaTo«  «ts  wavras  av0p<o;rovs  eis  Si/caio><nv  £<ofc.  It  will  be  noticed  that  in 

our  English  version  the  words  "judgment  came"  and  "the  free  gift 
came"  are  inserted  by  the  translators. 


PART  III. 

THE  CONFIRMATIONS  OF  THEOLOGY. 


PART  III. 

THE  CONFIRMATIONS  OF  THEOLOGY. 

CHAPTER  I. 

THE  COMMON  VIEW  STATED  AND  COMPARED. 

IN  the  exhibition  of  the  view  presented  in  the 
foregoing  pages,  the  object  of  this  work  is  substan- 
tially accomplished.  Our  purpose  in  it  is  to  discover 
the  true  import  of  the  narrative  which  we  have 
reviewed,  not  to  support  or  to  controvert  any  par- 
ticular deductions  from  it.  The  true  interpreta- 
tion of  Scripture  arrived  at,  we  leave  to  others  its 
proper  application  in  the  department  of  Theology. 
The  field  for  which  we  assume  responsibility  is 
within  the  limits  of  the  narrative  alone,  and  should 
we  or  others  fall  into  mistaken  inferences  from  the 
results  to  which  we  have  arrived,  as  these  erroneous 
deductions  cannot  impair  the  truth  of  the  premises, 
so  they  ought  not  to  influence  the  judgment  to  be 
passed  upon  them.  But  notwithstanding  the  peril 
of  entering  the  mists  of  theological  speculation, 
where  so  many  and  great  minds  have  been  "  in 
wandering  mazes  lost,"  as  anything  that  tends  to 
confirm  the  truth  of  the  interpretation  we  contend 


224  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

for  may  reasonably  claim  our  attention,  we  propose 
to  advert,  as  briefly  as  may  be,  to  a  few  of  those 
objections  which  Theology  suggests  to  the  common 
view  of  Adam's  character,  history,  and  relations  to 
the  race,  for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  these  ob- 
jections are  avoided  by  the  adoption  of  our  own. 

Skeptics  have  ever  made  it  a  reproach  against 
Theology,  and  even  believers  have  found  it  a  painful 
mystery,  that  there  have  sprung  from  its  teachings 
so  many  variant  dogmas  and  creeds,  all  based  on 
seeming  truths,  yet  in  many  cases  mutually  irrecon- 
cilable. That  there  may  be  a  variety  of  aspects  in 
which  the  same  truth  may  be  regarded,  and  that 
thus  in  the  theological  domain,  from  the  want  of 
Revelation  or  its  uncertainty,  as  well  as  from  the 
limited  powers  of  the  human  mind,  there  may  be 
different  modes  of  contemplating  or  applying  the 
same  general  principles,  may  be  easily  granted.  But 
that  propositions  should  arise,  all  apparently  truth- 
ful to  a  certain  extent,  and  yet  inconsistent ;  while 
from  the  diverse  attempts  to  reconcile  such  contra- 
dictions, or  from  disputes  as  to  which  of  these  dis- 
cordant truths  is  most  essential  and  vital,  and  should, 
therefore,  override  the  rest,  doubts  and  confusion 
should  ensue,  is  a  more  serious  difficulty.  It  ought, 
nevertheless,  rather  to  convince  us  that  there  is 
error  in  the  premises  whence  these  discrepancies  are 
drawn,  than  shake  our  faith  in  either  Revelation  or 
Reason.  For  it  is  self-evident  that  truth  must  be 
uniform.  The  fundamental  principles  and  the  fun- 


THE  COMMON  VIEW  STATED  AND  COMPARED.    225 

damental  facts  of  God's  moral  government  must  be 
consistent  with  themselves  and  each  other.  He 
cannot  be  the  only  being  in  the  universe  whose 
character  is  falsified  by  his  voluntary  acts ;  hence 
his  word  cannot  manifest  him  in  a  light  which  Rea- 
son may  not  discover  to  be  consistent,  benevolent, 
and  just.  If  the  thought  and  study  of  ages  have 
failed  to  effect  such  a  reconcilement,  this  fact  argues 
a  misinterpretation  of  Scripture,  and  demands  its 
reconsideration.  And,  therefore,  if  under  one  view 
of  Adam's  disobedience  and  its  consequences,  Rev- 
elation and  Reason  seem  at  variance,  while  under 
another  they  are  clear  and  harmonious,  this  is  of  it- 
self an  argument  for  the  adoption  of  the  latter  view 
rather  than  the  former. 

That  the  theory  we  have  urged  in  the  forego- 
ing pages  does  in  all  cases  avoid  such  discrepancies 
in  relation  to  the  subjects  involved  in  it,  would 
be  perhaps  a  presumptuous  averment,  before  it 
shall  have  been  fully  tested  by  time  and  discussion. 
We  propose,  however,  to  consider  some  of  the  more 
prominent  difficulties  which  arise  upon  the  common 
view  of  "  Adam's  fall,"  and  which  ages  of  contro- 
versy have  not  cleared  up,  as  finding  in  it  a  reason- 
able solution.  And  in  order  that  the  nature  of  these 
difficulties  may  be  more  clearly  apprehended,  it  will 
be  proper  for  us  to  settle  distinctly,  at  the  outset, 
what  the  ordinary  view  inculcates  with  regard  to 
Adam's  original  nature,  his  disobedience,  and  its 
effects  upon  mankind. 

15 


226  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

The  more  liberal  theologians,  especially  those  of 
modern  times,  seem  disposed  to  modify  the  extreme 
views  of  Adam's  original  nature  and  character 
which  have  in  some  quarters  obtained,  and  which 
are  thus  expressed  in  the  Westminster  Catechism : 
"  God  created  man  in  his  own  image,  in  knowledge, 
righteousness,  and  holiness."  Though  the  doctrine 
of  man's  original  holiness  in  character  and  disposi- 
tion, has  been  in  times  past,  and  perhaps  still  gen- 
erally is,  held  by  the  great  body  of  believers,  yet  as 
there  has  been  among  the  leading  writers  an  inclina- 
tion to  qualify  it,  our  attention  ought  to  be  directed 
to  the  more  moderate  view.  This  may  be  stated  to 
be  that  Adam,  though  a  moral  creature,  conscious 
of  the  distinction  between  right  and  wrong,  capable 
of  choosing  between  them  and  accountable  for  his 
choice,  and  in  this  freedom  or  capability  to  act  in 
either  direction,  choosing  to  do  right,  preferring  in 
his  conduct  holiness  to  sin,  was  yet  not  what  can 
be  called  a  holy  being.  That  he  was  only  an  inno- 
cent childlike  creature,  without  sin,  chiefly  because 
without  experience  of  temptation  ;  morally  intelli- 
gent, indeed,  but  weak  in  rectitude,  because  without 
moral  discipline  and  training.  The  description  by  Dr. 
Bushnell  of  primeval  man  ("  Nature  and  the  Super- 
natural," p.  104)  is  among  the  most  recent,  and  is, 
perhaps,  the  most  clear  and  elegant :  "  He  (the  Cre- 
ator) will  have  given  us,  or  at  least  the  original  new 
created  progenitors,  a  constituently  perfect  mould. 
So  that  taken  simply  as  forms  of  being,  apart  from 


THE  COMMON  VIEW  STATED  AND  COMPARED.     227 

any  character  begun  by  action,  they  are  in  that  ex- 
act harmony  and  perfection,  that,  without  or  before 
deliberation,  spontaneously  runs  to  good ;  organi- 
cally ready  with  all  heavenly  affinities  in  play,  to 
break  out  in  a  perfect  song.  So  far,  they  are  inno- 
cent and  holy  by  creation,  or  by  the  simple  fact  of 
their  constituent  perfection  in  the  image  of  their 
Maker  ;  only  there  is  no  sufficient  strength  or 
security  in  their  holiness,  because  there  is  no  de- 
liberative element  it  it."  Other  writers  hold  sub- 
stantially the  same  view  ;  thus  Dr.  Harris  ("  Man 
Primeval,"  p.  395)  declares :  "  As  a  free  agent, 
his  liabilities  would  (apart  from  a  special  provision 
to  the  contrary)  be  coextensive  with  his  multiplied 
obligations.  His  nature  is  a  living  law  table." 
"  That  his  nature  was  potentially  (not  actually) 
perfect,  we  affirm  in  effect,  when  we  say  he  was 
made  in  the  Divine  image,"  (p.  432.)  In  connec- 
tion with  the  views  thus  set  forth,  is  to  be  remarked, 
nevertheless,  the  obvious  truth,  as  expressed  by  Dr. 
Harris  in  another  place,  that  in  any  moral  agent, 
"  mere  sinlessness,  even  for  a  moment,  is  impossible. 
The  nature  of  a  moral  being  involves  the  neces- 
sity at  every  moment  of  actual  compliance  with 
every  known  claim  of  law,  or  else  the  actual  refusal 
of  such  compliance."  So,  also,  President  Edwards 
remarks  in  his  "  Treatise  on  Original  Sin,"  (p.  106,) 
"  In  a  moral  agent,  subject  to  moral  obligations,  it 
is  the  same  thing  to  be  perfectly  innocent  as  to 
be  perfectly  righteous."  Without  multiplying  ci- 


228  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

tations  farther,  we  may  say,  generally,  that  there 
are  almost  no  theologians  who  do  not  at  least  hold, 
with  these  writers,  that  man's  moral  faculties  were 
so  far  awake  and  informed  as  to  make  him  fully 
accountable  for  his  acts ;  that  his  disposition  was 
naturally  and  voluntarily  right ;  and  that  he  was  not 
only  absolutely,  and  from  choice,  "  sinless,"  (which 
sinlessness  in  a  moral  being  must  clearly  be,  as  stated 
by  Harris  and  Edwards,  the  same  thing  as  holiness,) 
but  was  in  his  moral  nature  and  capabilities  at 
least  "  potentially  "  perfect,  —  a  capability  which  is 
claimed  by  but  few  to  subsist  in  him  since  "  the 
apostasy." 

Taking,  then,  even  this  qualified  estimate  of 
man's  original  moral  character,  it  would  seem  that 
the  distinction  attempted  to  be  made  between  his 
supposed  "  sinlessness  "  or  "  innocence,"  as  a  moral 
agent,  and  the  "  holiness "  by  others  ascribed  to 
him,  does  not  suggest  any  real  difference  in  the 
theories.  We  should  be  at  a  loss  to  give  a  defini- 
tion of  a  holy  being,  if  that  of  "  a  being  knowing 
the  difference  between  right  and  wrong,  and  free  to 
choose  between  them,  who  voluntarily  remains  in  a 
state  of  moral  rectitude,"  does  not  apply.  Nor 
does  the  supposition  that  he  has  never  felt  tempta- 
tion to  be  otherwise,  affect  the  case  so  far  as  we  can 
discover ;  for  if  temptation  (i.  e.,  a  motive  actually 
exciting  inclination  to  sin)  be  essential  to  holiness, 
it  is  difficult  to  see  how  that  attribute  can  be  as- 
cribed to  God  himself,  who  certainly  cannot  be  im- 


THE  COMMON  VIEW  STATED  AND  COMPARED.     229 

agined  to  have  ever  been  in  any  degree  disposed  to 
do  evil. 

This  modification  of  the  old  doctrine  of  man's 
original  holiness,  seems  to  have  been  adopted  in 
order  to  avoid  the  difficulty  which  that  suggested, 
in  connection  with  the  fact  that  man,  thus  holy, 
yielded  so  readily  to  the  first  assaults  of  sin.  But 
were  it  admissible  at  all,  it  would  itself  create  an 
equal  difficulty,  in  the  necessity  to  account  for  the 
radical  and  permanent  change  which  is  still  sup- 
posed to  have  been  occasioned  by  the  transgression, 
both  in  God's  relations  and  disposition  toward  man, 
and  in  man's  own  nature,  character,  and  destiny. 
For  it  would  seem  strange  that  the  Creator  who  had 
formed  him  thus  on  the  very  division  line  between 
holiness  and  sin,  —  so  nearly  on  it,  indeed,  that,  as 
some  writers  insist,  his  overstepping  it  at  the  first 
pressure  was  inevitable, —  should  have  discarded  him 
with  anger  when  he  so  toppled  across.  Still  more 
strange  would  it  be  that  so  small  a  change  of  position 
should  have  been  regarded  as  so  immense,  so  irre- 
coverable ;  that  so  slight  a  shock  to  his  nature  should 
have  shivered  it  into  ruins.  We  can  comprehend 
how  an  angel  who,  by  a  mighty  rush,  has  broken 
away  from  holy  inclinations  and  influences,  and  aban- 
doned his  soul  to  the  tide  of  evil  passions,  to  follow 
them  thenceforth  as  its  ruling  forces,  should  leave 
behind  him  all  thought  and  all  power  of  return,  and 
declare  eternal  war  against  God  and  goodness.  But 
we  do  not  so  clearly  understand  why  an  innocent, 


230  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

•well-meaning  creature,  which,  like  a  child,  is  just 
beginning  to  use  its  moral  faculties,  should,  because 
its  feeble  hand  has  failed  in  the  first  attempt  to 
wield  them  steadily,  find  itself  in  consequence  for- 
ever incapable  of  holding  and  applying  them  with 
even  its  original  firmness  and  skill.  If,  therefore, 
any  of  the  various  doctrines  be  adopted  which  make 
man  originally  "  a  moral  agent,  free  to  sin,  but  sin- 
less by  disposition  and  intelligent  choice,"  then,  we 
insist,  his  character  must  be  considered  as  far  differ- 
ent from  that  of  "  childlike  innocence,"  (the  dis- 
tinguishing feature  of  which  is  the  deficiency  or 
obscurity  of  moral  intelligence,)  and  as  so  closely 
allied  to  that  of  a  "  holy  "  creature  as  to  justify  our 
so  regarding  and  styling  him.  And,  in  confirmation 
of  this  conclusion,  we  may  quote  one  of  the  most 
recent  and  able  writers  on  this  subject,  who,  distin- 
guishing between  the  original  (concreated)  holiness 
of  Adam,  and  the  holiness  of  his  primal  charac- 
ter, quotes  Turretin's  description  of  the  latter  as  pe- 
culiarly "  correct  and  felicitous  "  : l  "  It  compre- 
hended knowledge  in  the  understanding,  holiness  in 
the  will,  rectitude  in  the  affections,  and  such  an 
entire  harmony  in  all  his  faculties  that  his  members 
were  obedient  to  his  affections,  his  affections  to  his 
will,  his  will  to  his  understanding,  and  his  under- 
standing to  the  Divine  law."  The  original  holiness 
of  his  nature,  however,  the  writer  concludes  to  have 
been  "  not  so  properly  just  views  of  God,  and  proper 

1  Payne's  Lectures  on  Original  Sin,  p.  15. 


THE  COMMON  VIEW  STATED  AND  COMPARED.     231 

affections  in  regard  to  God,  i.  <?.,  right  thinking  and 
feeling.  It  was  something  which  stood,  partly  at 
least,  in  the  relation  of  cause  to  all  this, —  something 
which  led  to  all  this.  It  was,  in  short,  that  spiritual 
life  which  we  have  predicated  of  the  mind  of  Adam 
on  his  creation,  resulting  from  the  presence  and 
influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God.  Holiness 
was  thus  native  to  Adam.  He  was  created  spirit- 
ually alive,  though  all  spiritual  apprehensions  and 
affections,  i.  e.,  all  spiritual  actings,  were  subsequent 
to  his  creation."  1  "  The  holy  principle,  the  spirit- 
ual life  which  we  have  predicated  of  him,  had  its 
natural  actings  in  obedience  ;  it  rendered  it  his 
meat  and  his  drink  to  do  the  will  of  his  Father  in 
heaven."  2 

This  "  original  holiness,"  then,  being  a  cardinal 
doctrine  of  the  common  view  in  all  its  modifications, 
it  goes  on  to  assume  that,  in  consequence  of  such 
natural  and  voluntary  virtue,  man  was  regarded  by 
his  Maker  with  complacency  and  favor.  This  it  was 
which  caused  God  to  walk  and  associate  with  his 
creature  in  familiar  friendship  as  a  being  worthy  of 
his  companionship  and  love.  While  in  this  state  of 
free  moral  agency,  "  under  obligation  to  keep  the 
whole  law,"  and  voluntarily  doing  so,  for  some  rea- 
son unexplained,  but  as  if  the  moral  law  itself  were 
either  not  a  sufficient,  or  perhaps  too  severe  a  test 
for  this  holy  yet  frail  humanity,  a  special  command 
is  imposed  upon  Adam,  whereon  the  whole  future 

l  Payne's  Lectures  on  Original  Sin,  p.  19.  a  Ibid.  p.  21. 


232  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

career,  character,  and  destiny  of  himself  and  his 
race  are  made  to  depend.  The  peculiar  nature  of 
this  test  \ve  must  leave  to  its  advocates  to  explain. 
"  It  is  not  that  he  is  thereby  discharged  from  any 
of  his  other  obligations.  This  he  could  not  be ;  but 
by  some "  mysterious  "  Divine  influence  or  sover- 
eign appointment,  his  thousand  liabilities  are  reduced 
to  one.  He  was  rendered  invulnerable  except  at 
one  point.  Looking  abroad  over  the  wide  field  of 
duty,  he  might  already  foretaste  the  security  of 
heaven,  save  in  one  spot.  This  was  moral  liability 
reduced  to  a  minimum." l 

This  sole  and  special  probationary  mandate,  it  is 
said,  man  deliberately  violated.  Led  away  by  some 
incomprehensible  desire  for  knowledge  (but  what 
knowledge  is  either  not  explained,  or  in  dispute), 
he  partook  of  the  forbidden  fruit,  and  in  so  doing 
wilfully  sinned  against  his  Maker.  The  effect  at- 
tached instantaneously,  conspicuously,  and  forever. 
In  the  very  act,  and  during  its  occurrence,  he  fell 
from  his  high  estate  and  glorious  prospects.  His  soul 
turned  at  once  into  channels  of  guilt,  and  began  to 
flow  with  fatal  sweep  down  the  descent  of  sin.  His 
nature,  as  is  generally  held,  underwent  a  sudden 
and  material  change,  though  what  that  change  was, 
or  how  exhibited,  has  been  the  topic  of  endless  dis- 
cussion. His  relations  toward  God  were  imme- 
diately altered  for  the  worse  ;  but  in  what  way,  and 
to  what  extent,  has  never  been  agreed  ;  only  it  is 

l  Harris,  Man  Primeval,  p.  396. 


THE  COMMON  VIEW  STATED  AND  COMPARED.     233 

admitted  that,  in  consequence  of  the  transgression 
and  the  change  which  it  effected  in  him,  God  came 
either  to  contemplate  him  less  favorably,  or  at  least 
to  associate  with  him  less  familiarly  than  before. 
His  act  having  been  representative  for  the  race,  his 
posterity  share  in  its  evil  results.  In  what  way 
they  were  affected  by  it  has  never  been  agreed ;  but 
it  is  generally  allowed  that,  in  consequence  of  it, 
they  come  into  the  world,  not  indeed  less  free  in 
moral  agency  nor  with  less  personal  accountability 
for  their  acts,  but  with  a  nature  abnormal  or  de- 
formed, less  prone  to  good  than  that  original  one 
of  their  first  progenitor,  and,  as  most  insist,  possess- 
ing less  capability  of  attaining  to  moral  perfection. 

These  are  all  the  points  in  the  ordinary  view  of 
Adam's  history  to  which  we  need  refer ;  and  these 
we  believe  (although  possibly  with  some  modifica- 
tions in  form  here  and  there)  are  and  must  be 
substantially  adopted  by  all  believers  in  Adam's 
original  moral  agency.  It  will  now  be  proper  for 
us  to  note  distinctly  with  how  many  of  these  propo- 
sitions and  how  far  our  view  is  consistent.  It  ad- 
mits then  — 

1.  That  Adam  was  created,  and  continued  up  to 
the  disobedience,  a  noble  and  sinless  being,  and  in 
intimate  and  friendly  association  with  his  Maker. 

2.  That  to  him,  as  such  being,  a  special  command 
was   given,  on  which  were   made   to  depend   his 
moral  destiny  and  that  of  his  coming  race. 

3.  That  he  disobeyed  that  command,  and  that, 


234        THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

consequent  upon  this  transgression,  a  radical  change 
occurred  in  him  with  respect  to  a  moral  nature  and 
relations,  —  a  change  which  left  him,  however,  a 
moral  agent,  personally  accountable,  and  with  in- 
herent tendencies  to  pursue  in  life  a  course  of  con- 
duct self-gratifying  and  sinful. 

4.  That  in  consequence  of  that  change  the  per- 
sonal intimacy  of  his  Maker  was  withdrawn,  and 
that  man  subsequently  fell  under   the  power  and 
dominion  of  his  appetites  and  became  a  sinful  creat- 
ure. 

5.  That  all  Adam's  posterity,  in  consequence  of 
his  transgression,  inherit  a  nature  like  that  which  he 
possessed   after   the   transgression,  instead  of  that 
with  which  he  was  originally  formed.     And  that 
thus  the  existence  of  sin  in  the  world,  and  men's 
liability  to  it,  may  be  referred  back  for  their  origin 
to  Adam's  transgression. 

The  exposition  of  these  propositions  under  our 
view  has  been  already  set  forth  in  the  preceding 
pages.  We  have  there  seen  how  Adam  in  his 
original  state,  with  grand  and  vigorous  intellectual 
powers,  and  a  soul  whose  want  of  an  innate  moral 
sense  was  supplied  by  the  Divine  temporary  in- 
struction and  guidance,  must  of  necessity,  at  least 
for  some  period  of  time  in  his  early  existence,  have 
been  an  exalted  and  innocent  being.  That  there 
subsisted  within  him,  nevertheless,  in  full  array,  the 
slumbering  appetites  of  his  natural  constitution, 
whose  undeveloped  energies  required  but  time  and 


THE  COMMON  VIEW  STATED  AND  COMPARED.      235 

opportunity  to  press  beyond  their  due  and  healthful 
bounds,  and,  gaining  the  ascendancy  in  his  being, 
to  achieve  its  final  overthrow.  We  have  shown 
that  by  the  transgression  these  innate  tendencies 
were  unchanged  in  nature  or  in  force  ;  that  the 
only  bearing  of  that  act  upon  them  was  an  indirect 
one,  —  that  of  investing  their  indulgence  with  a 
moral  character  ;  that  this  new  influence  or  effect, 
however,  implied  in  itself  a  radical  progress  in  man's 
moral  condition  and  relations  ;  that  by  virtue  of 
it,  the  undue  allowance  of  these  propensities,  other- 
wise morally  innocent,  came  to  be  sinful,  and  man's 
prevailing  tendencies  towards  such  allowance,  ten- 
dencies to  evil,  —  influences  and  manifestations  of 
corruption  and  depravity.  That  thus  also  all  his 
posterity,  inheriting  from  him  these  natural  propen- 
sities by  virtue  of  Adam's  original  animal  nature, 
and  inheriting  too  these  moral  perceptions  by  virtue 
of  his  moral  nature  acquired  through  the  transgres- 
sion, find  themselves  in  consequence  of  that  act  in- 
fluenced by  inherent  powerful  tendencies  sweeping 
them  toward  evil.  How  far  these  tendencies  toward 
sin,  arising  from  the  native  force  of  the  passions,  are 
strong  enough  to  affect  man's  freedom  of  action,  is 
a  fair  question  for  metaphysical  discussion  under 
any  view,  or  no  view,  of  his  moral  relations.  That 
they  are  so  powerful  that  no  mere  human  being 
has  in  fact  ever  completely  controlled  them,  is  un- 
disputed. But  it  is  to  be  noted  that  He  "  who  was 
made  in  all  points  like  as  we  are,  yet  without  sin," 


236  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

did  overcome  them,  and  we  should  therefore  be 
cautious  in  asserting  that  they  are  absolutely  irre- 
sistible. Indeed,  in  such  an  inquiry  we  should  find 
it  difficult  to  estimate  the  natural  strength  of  our 
propensities,  as  distinguished  from  their  developed 
strength  through  repeated  indulgence ;  yet  when 
we  speak  of  man's  inherent  tendencies  to  evil,  we 
must  refer  to  the  former  alone.  Can  we  be  sure 
that  these  are  such  as  to  warp  and  determine  human 
character  with  a  power  beyond  man's  capacity  of 
control  ?  May  it  not  be  that  if  he  were  to  train 
his  moral  powers  unswervingly  from  infancy  in  the 
government  of  his  passions,  just  as  instead  thereof 
he  from  the  outset  permits  his  passions  to  override 
his  conscience,  he  might  at  length  secure  for  virtue 
the  easy  and  undisputed  ascendancy  in  his  soul  ? 

Whatever  may  be  the  possibilities  of  the  case,  it 
is  certain  that  none  of  Adam's  posterity  have,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  achieved  in  life  or  in  heart  the  entire 
subjection  of  passion  to  duty.  As  the  actual  result, 
therefore,  of  their  moral  agency,  they  have  come  to 
be  sinners,  with  controlling  tendencies  toward  sin. 
Here  is  the  true  "  apostasy"  both  of  Adam  and  the 
race,  their  falling  into  sinfulness  almost  at  once 
upon  entering  on  their  moral  career.  Let  us  not 
be  understood,  however,  as  maintaining  that  since 
the  transgression  man  has  any  natural  or  acquired 
disposition  toward  sin  for  its  own  sake  in  preference 
to  holiness.  The  distinction  is  to  be  observed  be- 
tween the  indulgence  of  the  natural  propensities, 


THE  COMMON  VIEW  STATED  AXD  COMPARED.      237 

and  the  moral  character  of  such  indulgence.  It  is 
true  that  man  turns  to  gratification  more  readily 
than  to  resistance,  yet  it  is  not  true  that  he  there- 
fore prefers  the  sin  involved  in  it,  to  the  virtue  of 
abstaining.  Love  sin  in  the  abstract  he  does  not. 
On  the  contrary,  he  by  innate  instinct  hates  moral 
evil,  and  loves  moral  good.  God's  declaration  in 
the  garden,  that  he  would  "  put  enmity  "  between 
Man  and  the  principle  of  evil,  has  not  been  falsi- 
fied. He  blames  himself  for  vice,  and  yields  to  it ; 
not  because  he  finds  pleasure  in  the  criminality,  but 
because  his  appetites  solicit  him  more  effectually 
than  his  principles.  It  is  this  very  truth  which  en- 
hances, if  indeed  it  does  not  constitute,  the  guilt 
of  his  act.  Had  he  an  inborn  pleasure  in  sin  for 
its  own  sake,  God,  who  so  created  him,  would  share 
with  him  the  responsibility  for  its  choice.  It  is 
because  he  has  these  better  instincts  and  prompt- 
ings by  nature,  and  because  his  Will  (given  him 
for  their  -support)  permits  them  on  the  contrary  to 
be  supplanted  by  abnormal  passions,  that  he,  and 
he  alone,  is  held  accountable  for  his  wickedness  and 
folly. 

It  is  strenuously  argued  by  many,  indeed,  that 
the  universal  sinfulness  of  man  is  of  itself  irresist- 
ible proof  of  a  native  tendency  to  sin.  Such  is  the 
argument  of  the  great  Jonathan  Edwards  in  sup- 
port of  the  doctrine  of  native  corruption  or  deprav- 
ity. If  the  claim  be  that  it  indicates  a  constitu- 
tional superiority  of  influence  over  the  mind  and 


238  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

will  of  the  inferior  or  material  principles  inclosed 
in  the  material  body,  —  in  other  words,  the  natural 
power  of  the  appetites  to  influence  and  control 
man's  actions,  —  it  must  be  admitted  ;  but  if  it  be 
meant  that  man  has  an  inborn  love  of  sinfulness  for 
its  own  sake,  it  must  be  denied.  In  thus  yielding 
to  his  appetites,  man  but  follows  the  analogy  of  all 
animals  in  recklessly  obeying,  even  to  excess,  their 
animal  impulses ;  and  the  fact  in  him  no  more 
proves  a  natural  depravity  or  love  of  sin  for  its  own 
sake  than  it  does  in  them.  True,  in  the  human 
animal  the  restraints  to  be  overcome  are  stronger, 

o       * 

but  so  are  the  appetites  and  the  temptations.  True, 
in  him  this  subservience  and  bondage  to  passion  are 
far  more  degrading,  and,  in  consequence  of  his 
moral  light,  are  invested  with  an  infinitely  more 
fearful  and  distressing  character.  We  do  not  argue 
against  the  evil  or  the  heinousness  of  sin  ;  but  we 
insist  that  these  outbreaks  of  appetite  —  these  "  vic- 
tories obtained  by  the  inferior  principles  of  man's 
nature,  especially  the  animal  propensities,  over  rea- 
son and  conscience,"  1  (for  this  is  laid  down  by 
these  writers  as  the  definition  of  actual  sin)  —  do 
not  nevertheless  demonstrate  an  innate  love  of  sin- 
fulness  in  him,  any  more  than  similar  outbreaks, 
though  against  less  potent  opposition,  demonstrate  a 
hatred  of  Nature's  laws  and  of  the  universal  order 
in  the  inferior  races  which  also  exhibit  them.  It  is 
surprising  that  the  obvious  distinction  between  acts 

1  Payne's  Lectures,  p.  373. 


THE  COMMON  VIEW  STATED  AND  COMPARED.     239 

themselves,  and  the  abstract  moral  character  invest- 
ing those  acts,  has  been  so  often  overlooked  in  these 
discussions,  and  to  its  neglect  much  of  the  confusion 
that  marks  them  is  attributable. 


240  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTER  II. 

DIFFICULTIES. ENCOUNTERED  BY  THE  COMMON  VIEW, 
AND  THEIR  SOLUTION. 

WE  now  pass  to  examine  some  of  the  difficulties 
attending  the  ordinary  view,  as  we  have  presented 
it,  in  order  to  inquire  whether  that  which  we  sup- 
port would  enable  us  to  avoid  them.  These  diffi- 
culties are,  of  course,  of  a  different  sort  from  those 
which  we  have  already  considered,  as  arising  out 
of  the  narrative.  They  are  simply  such  as  exist 
intrinsically  in  the  doctrines  themselves,  or  are 
developed  by  their  mutual  comparison,  and  they 
suggest  errors  in  these  by  revealing  inconsistencies 
where  truth  should  disclose  only  general  harmony. 

The  first  difficulty  to  which  we  will  advert  is 
one  that  has  greatly  embarrassed  theologians,  and 
springs  from  the  doctrine  of  Adam's  original,  intel- 
ligent, and  voluntary  holiness  and  obedience,  taken 
in  connection  with  the  doctrine  of  his  subsequent 
deliberate  sin.  A  late  writer,  whom  we  have  before 
quoted,  thus  refers  to  the  strange  phenomenon  :  — 
"  Adam  was  created  in  the  image  of  God  —  in  the 
full  maturity  of  his  powers.  The  law  of  God  and 
the  law  of  love  were  inscribed  upon  his  heart.  His 
body  was  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Preserved 
as  we  have  seen  he  was  by  this  Divine  agent  from 


DIFFICULTIES  Am>  THEIR  SOLUTION.          241 

moral  failure  on  all  other  points,  he  was  left  without 
any  special  divine  influence  to  guard  him  against 
taking  the  forbidden  fruit.  Still  his  mind  was  in  a 
perfectly  holy  state ;  the  disposition  to  obedience 
remained  in  all  its  pristine  vigor  up  to  the  moment 
of  temptation  ;  he  had  the  strongest  conceivable 
motives  to  resist  it ;  the  destinies  of  the  entire  race 
were  in  his  keeping  ;  he  must  ruin  himself  and  his 
race  if  he  did  not  stand  fast  in  his  integrity.  And 
yet  he  fell !  Man  in  innocence  and  holiness,  sank  ; 
and  sank  just  at  the  point,  too,  where  he  was  left, 
as  I  conceive,  to  the  unaided  support  of  his  vigorous 
and  perfect  moral  powers." 1  In  this  passage,  how- 
ever, forcible  as  it  is,  the  difficulty  to  which  we 
now  refer  is  only  dimly  suggested.  If  Adam's 
"mind  was  in  a  perfectly  holy  state,  the  dispo- 
sition to  obedience  in  all  its  pristine  vigor,"  by  what 
possibility  could  he  be  brought  at  once  voluntarily 
to  act  in  opposition  to  this  mental  state  and  disposi- 
tion ?  The  supposition  that  he  was  left  unsustained 
by  special  divine  aid  at  this  particular  point  does 
not  account  for  it  ;  for  he  is  said  to  have  had, 
nevertheless,  his  natural  holiness  both  of  disposition 
and  habit  to  oppose  to  temptation.  This  difficulty 
is  no  imaginary  one  in  metaphysics.  "  The  ques- 
tion," says  Dr.  Dwight,  "  How  can  a  holy  being 
become  sinful  ?  or,  How  can  a  holy  being  transgress 
the  law  of  God  ?  is  a  question  to  which,  perhaps, 
no  satisfactory  philosophical  reply  can  be  given."  a 

1  Payne's  Lectures,  p.  98.  2  Dwighfs  TheoL,  Vol.  I.  p.  410. 

16 


242  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

So  also  Dr.  Harris :  "  How  sin  is  metaphysically 
possible  in  a  perfect  being  we  know  not.  Innumer- 
able solutions  have  been  attempted."  l  And  he 
adds,  in  a  note  quoting  Dr.  A.  Neander :  "Accord- 
ing to  my  conviction,  the  origin  of  evil  can  only  be 
understood  as  a  fact,  —  a  fact  possible  by  virtue  of 
the  freedom  belonging  to  a  created  being,  but  not 
to  be  otherwise  deduced  or  explained." 

The  difficulty  may  be  thus  stated :  If  Adam  was 
a  being  entirely  occupied  and  directed  by  a  holy 
disposition,  this  holiness  of  disposition  or  "  holy 
principle  "  must  have  prevented  the  rise  of  incli- 
nation to  sinfulness.  And  if  he  could  thus  have 
had  no  inclination  to  sin,  how  can  he  be  conceived 
to  perpetrate  sin  ?  The  problem  springs  from  the 
doctrine  that  that  which  constitutes  a  man's  con- 
trolling principle  of  action  determines  his  conduct 
in  every  given  case.  "  Upon  this  foundation,"  says 
Dr.  Dwight,  "  the  inquiry  [how  could  Adam  sin  ?] 
is  made ;  and  if  the  foundation  be  solid  and  just, 
the  inquiry  cannot  be  answered,  because  in  the 
actual  case  there  was  no  other  principle  of  action 
than  a  holy  principle." 

1  Man  Primeval,  p.  404.  To  the  same  effect  see  Muller's  Christian 
Doctrine  of  Sin,  Vol.  II.  p.  396.  "  We  are  not  at  all  able  to  see  how 
the  possibility  of  evil  for  the  personal  creature  could  have  been  present 
from  the  beginning,  (of  -which  we  have  the  most  striking  proof  in  the 
same  having  become  a  reality,)  if  directly  at  the  beginning  he  was  pos- 
sessed of  moral  perfection."  And  again:  "  The  possibility  of  the  fall  is 
not  reconcilable  with  the  moral  perfection  of  the  personal  creature, 
consistently  with  a  correct  insight  into  the  notion  of  creaturely  free- 
dom." 


DIFFICULTIES  AND  THEIR  SOLUTION.          243 

Should  any  insist,  however,  that  a  free  agent 
must  necessarily  have  the  power  of  acting  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  prevailing  "  principle "  of  his  mind, 
and  that  it  is  therefore  no  impossibility  for  a  holy 
being  to  sin,  we  may  present  the  inquiry  to  such  in 
another  form.  Suppose  the  temptation  just  sug- 
gested to  Adam  in  his  imagined  state  of  intelligence 
and  virtue.  It  is  the  first  approach  of  sin  to  that 
clear  and  holy  mind ;  and  in  itself  considered,  there- 
fore, must  be  repulsive  and  alarming.  We  learn 
that  he  was  not  taken  by  surprise,  but  deliberately 
surveyed  and  weighed  the  criminal  proposal.  His 
appetites  are  in  perfect  repose  and  in  normal  sub- 
ordination to  reason  and  conscience ;  hence  there  is 
nothing  here  to  incline  to  the  sin  whose  deformity 
is  so  manifest  and  so  odious.  Through  his  moral 
intelligence  and  reason  he  is  fully  conscious  of  and 
weighs  all  the  inducements  that  can  be  offered  for 
and  against  compliance,  and  finds  the  motives  for 
refusal  to  be  paramount.1  Thus  disposition,  con- 
science, and  reason  all  unite  to  influence  him  to  a 
particular  course.  Now  is  it  conceivable  that  a 
rational  and  virtuous  being  will,  after  such  a  debate 
and  such  a  conclusion,  immediately  proceed  to  sin, 

1  It  may  be  objected  that  this  was  not  the  conclusion  he  arrived  at, 
having  been  deceived  into  committing  the  act  by  the  expectation  of 
greater  advantage  than  would  follow  abstaining.  But  had  he  been 
truly  under  the  influence  of  holiness,  —  his  desires  duly  subordinated 
to  his  duty,  —  he  would  not  have  been  deceived  into  this  expectation ; 
or  if  he  had,  it  would  not  have  proved  a  sufficiently  powerful  induce- 
ment to  sin.  We  are  supposing  him  to  have  been  under  such  influ- 
ences, and  to  have  reasoned  accordingly. 


244  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

not  only  without  motive  but  against  motive  and 
against  desire  ?  Is  not  such  a  result  as  inconceiv- 
able as  if  it  were  an  actual  impossibility  ?  Without 
engaging  in  a  metaphysical  discussion  of  the  bare 
power  of  a  free  agent  under  such  circumstances,  we 
cannot  doubt  a  ready  admission  that  to  believe  man 
would  thus  exert  it  for  his  own  misery  and  destruc- 
tion would  be  irrational  and  absurd.  From  such 
considerations  as  these,  therefore,  the  theologians, 
finding  themselves  unable  to  explain  the  occurrence 
of  Adam's  sin,  under  the  theory  of  his  prior  moral 
agency  and  virtue,  adopt  with  Dr.  D  wight  the  con- 
clusion that  "  a  cause  exists,  though  indefinable  and 
unintelligible  to  ourselves.  In  other  words,  the 
cause  is  unknown  except  by  its  effects." 

We  are  aware  that  some  have  sought  for  an  argu- 
ment, or  at  least  for  a  suggestion,  under  the  em- 
barrassment in  question,  by  referring  to  the  fallen 
angels  as  a  proof  that  holy  beings  have  sinned,  and 
that  the  alleged  difficulty,  therefore,  must  be  merely 
in  appearance.  Such  a  course  of  reasoning,  how- 
ever, is  worthy  of  no  consideration.  Admitting 
that  there  is  Scriptural  proof  that  such  beings  exist 
as  we  mean  by  "  fallen  angels,"  how  much  do  we 
know  of  their  nature  or  history  ?  Where  do  we  find 
such  definite  or  positive  evidence  that  they  were 
originally  holy,  or  respecting  the  circumstances  of 
their  defection,  as  suffice  to  demonstrate  an  analogy  ? 
Revelation  furnishes  us  with  little  information  re- 
garding them,  even  of  a  vague  and  almost  mythical 


DIFFICULTIES  AND  THEIR  SOLUTION.          245' 

nature  ;  enough,  indeed,  for  speculation  and  conject- 
ure, but  nothing  for  the  purposes  of  argument. 
Whether  their  moral  nature  and  relations  resembled 
those  of  man  ;  whether  their  intellectual  and  emo- 
tional being  were  similar  to  his  ;  amid  what  circum- 
stances and  influences  they  were  placed ;  what  led 
them  to  disobey  their  sovereign,  and  what  were 
the  character  and  the  consequences  of  that  disobe- 
dience,—  all  these  are  wrapped  in  obscurity.  To 
cite  them  in  the  present  discussion,  is  an  attempt 
to  elucidate  the  unintelligible  by  a  resort  to  the 
unknown.  No  one  can  say  that  were  they  fully 
disclosed,  they  would  throw  any  light  on  the  ques- 
tion, and  would  not  even  enhance  the  difficulty, 
instead  of  relieving  it.  In  the  discussion  of  matters 
pertaining  to  our  own  moral  career  and  relations, 
let  us  confine  ourselves  to  the  facts  and  principles 
which  our  Maker  has  placed  within  our  knowledge 
and  comprehension,  for  our  instruction  and  guid- 
ance. If  mysteries  arise  which  these  cannot  remove, 
let  us  frankly  admit  them,  but  let  us  not  seek  refuge 
or  concealment  in  that  which  is  still  more  obscure 
or  uncertain. 

We  ought  not  to  leave  this  topic  without  making 
one  point  more,  even  at  the  risk  of  repeating  some- 
what upon  previous  pages,  for  the  consideration  of 
those  who  may  still  believe  that  a  holy  being  might 
possibly  sin,  or  who  may  not  admit  that  Adam  had 
such  kind  or  degree  of  holiness  as  should  have 
proved  a  preventive.  Let  these  explain,  then,  if 


246  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

they  can,  how  Adam  with  the  least  virtue  of  dispo- 
sition, nay,  with  the  faintest  spark  of  prudence  or 
of  reason,  could,  situated  as  he  was,  have  yielded  so 
readily  to  so  slight  a  temptation,  against  such  over- 
whelming responsibilities  and  influences.  Let  us 
quote  from  another  the  circumstances  of  the  act : 
"  Adam  was  left,  in  regard  to  the  prohibition  of  the 
tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  to  the  unaided 
strength  of  his  own  mind,  —  a  mind  in  the  full  ma- 
turity of  its  powers,  and  in  a  perfect  moral  state.  .  .  . 
The  consequences  which  were  to  follow  transgres- 
sion were  of  two  kinds, —  personal  and  relative.  He 
himself  was  to  die  if  he  took  the  forbidden  fruit ; 
his  posterity  also  were  to  die  with  him.  How  tre- 
mendous the  responsibility  which  rested  upon  him  ! 
How  unparalleled  the  force  of  the  motives  which 
were  brought  to  bear  upon  him  !  How  incredibly 
superior  in  inherent  power  to  those  which  have 
been  brought  to  bear  upon  any  other  man  except 
the  God-man,  Jesus  Christ.  We  may  plunge  our- 
selves into  ruin, —  eternal  ruin.  We  may  indirectly 
bring  such  ruin  upon  those  who  spring  from  us  to 
the  latest  moment  of  time ;  but  we  cannot  plunge  a 
world  into  ruin !  Adam  was,  however,  placed  in 
circumstances  in  which  this  was  possible  to  him. 
The  condition  of  the  whole  race  was  practically  in 
his  hands.  He  could  bless  the  world  or  destroy 
the  world,  and  he  chose  to  destroy  it !  He  put  forth 
his  hand  and  took  the  fruit,  —  an  expression  which 
denotes  the  spontaneity  of  the  act,  —  and  ate  it,  and 


DIFFICULTIES  AND  THEIR  SOLUTION.          247 

brought  death  upon  himself  and  the  race.  I  marvel 
that  even  the  infidel  himself  does  not  blush  when  he 
talks  of  '  the  little  sin '  of  eating  the  apple  !  Can 
any  sin,  I  ask,  —  even  the  sin  of  Judas  in  betraying 
his  Lord,  or  the  sin  of  the  Jews  in  crucifying  him, — 
be  compared  with  the  atrocity  of  the  sin  of  Adam 
in  eating  this  apple?  Transgression  gathers  its 
guilt  from  the  magnitude  of  the  motives  to  avoid  it ; 
and  that  again  from  the  amount  of  ruin  and  wretch- 
edness into  which  it  plunges.  Who  then  can  calcu- 
late the  guilt  contracted  by  Adam  when  he  ate  the 
forbidden  fruit  ?  "  1 

And  yet  this  atrocious  —  this  enormous  sin  — com- 
mitted in  the  face  of  such  unparalleled  motives  to 
obedience,  it  is  alleged,  was  the  deliberate,  spon- 
taneous act  of  a  holy  being,  assailed  for  the  first 
time  by  temptation  !  And  how  great  was  that  temp- 
tation ?  The  inducements  which  could  lead  Adam 
to  set  aside  these  influences  and  restraints,  ought, 
according  to  all  known  rules  of  cause  and  effect,  to 
have  been  correspondingly  alluring,  at  least  in  ap- 
pearance. How  despicably  insignificant,  under  any 
view  of  them,  and  how  little  calculated  to  persuade 
a  reasoning  creature  they  were  in  fact,  we  have  seen 
in  another  part  of  this  work.  But  if  Adam  thus  fell 
into  guilt,  beside  which  even  that  of  Judas  grows 
dim,  he  —  the  holy  man,  except  in  this  one  fault  — 
must  surely  have  felt  afterwards  a  remorse  not  less 
than  that  of  the  corrupt  and  hardened  traitor !  And 

1  Payne's  Lectures  on  Original  Sin,  p.  47. 


248  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

yet  we  find  in  the  narrative  no  hint  of  anything 
more  than  a  natural  timidity  in  the  presence  of  his 
disobeyed  sovereign.  Is  it  credible,  is  it  conceiva- 
ble, we  ask  once  more,  that  a  crime  so  enormous, 
against  motives  so  overwhelming,  could  have  been 
perpetrated  by  a  holy  being  with  so  little  hesitation 
and  so  little  remorse  ? 

It  is  quite  manifest,  then,  that  the  difficulty  we  are 
considering  is  inseparable  from  the  doctrine  of 
Adam's  original  virtue  and  subsequent  fall,  under 
whatever  modifications  it  may  be  presented.  The 
only  escape  is  by  abandoning  the  idea  of  his  original 
moral  perfection,  and  this,  as  we  have  before  seen, 
implies  the  relinquishment  of  all  moral  agency. 
Then  of  course  disappears  also  the  idea  of  sin  in 
the  transgression ;  and  now  the  question  at  once 
arises,  If  Adam  was  not  a  moral  agent,  and  did  not 
sin  in  his  disobedience,  what  was  the  nature  of  that 
act  and  its  consequences  ?  —  a  question  to  establish 
whose  answer  these  pages  have  been  written.  Here 
the  whole  mystery,  in  fact  the  whole  problem,  is 
resolved.  Nor  does  any  other  equally  inexplicable 
assume  its  place,  as  so  often  occurs.  We  easily  ac- 
count for  Adam's  disobedience  in  the  circumstances 
in  which  we  suppose  him.  For  it  is  plain,  as  we 
have  before  exhibited  in  our  chapter  on  the  Trans- 
gression, that  to  suppose  a  disobedience  of  God's 
commands  by  one  who  had  only  reason  to  oppose  to 
the  seducer,  involves  no  such  mystery  as  that  of  a 
sin  by  a  holy  and  intelligent  being,  who  acts  against 


DIFFICULTIES  AND  THEIR  SOLUTION.          249 

the  remonstrances  alike  of  reason,  inclination,  and 
conscience. 

A  second  difficulty  which  grows  out  of  the  doc- 
trine of  Adam's  moral  agency,  and  his  moral  proba- 
tion in  the  command  which  he  disobeyed,  arises  from 
the  plain  and  admitted  principle,  that  as  such  moral 
agent  he  must  have  been  "  under  the  indispensable 
obligation  to  keep  the  whole  moral  law,"  while  it 
is  also  indisputable  that  "  his  acceptance,  justifica- 
tion, and  reward  were  suspended  upon  the  single 
point  of  his  abstaining  from  the  forbidde'n  fruit." 
Both  these  propositions  are  taken  from  Dr.  D wight, 
and  both  are,  in  some  form  or  other,  repeated  by 
other  theologians  ;  though  President  Edwards,  and 
those  of  his  views,  consider  that  the  "  acceptance, 
justification,  and  reward,"  thus  suspended  upon 
Adam's  obedience  to  the  special  mandate,  were  only 
the  acceptance,  etc.,  which  were  to  include  his  pos- 
terity. They  insist  that,  upon  all  other  matters,  his 
obligations  and  responsibilities  were  purely  personal ; 
that  in  this  alone  he  stood  in  a  representative  or 
federal  capacity.  With  this  qualification,  they  en- 
tirely sustain  the  proposition  above  cited  from 
Dr.  Dwight.  Thus  Dr.  Payne,  in  his  able  "  Lec- 
tures on  Original  Sin,"  says :  "  Little  room  is  left 
for  doubt  that  obedience,  on  other  points,  was  ren- 
dered certain,  by  sovereign  sustaining  grace  pre- 
venting failure,  and  that  in  no  point  was  his  obe- 
dience contingent  but  in  reference  to  the  condition 
of  the  charter.  The  Holy  Spirit,  dwelling  in  the 


250  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

mind  of  Adam,  may  easily  be  conceived  to  have 
secured  by  special  influence,  yet  in  a  manner  per- 
fectly compatible  with  free  agency,  obedience  to 
other  precepts,  while  He  put  forth  no  such  influence 
to  secure  obedience  to  the  interdict."  (p.  73.)  And 
we  may  cite  upon  the  same  point,  Dr.  Harris 
("  Man  Primeval,"  p.  395)  :  "  The  law  implies  that 
every  avenue  of  evil  was  for  him  closed  up  —  one 
excepted.  For  surely  it  was  not  to  be  understood 
that  he  might  violate  every  other  obligation,  natural 
and  moral,  with  impunity.  Left  to  himself,  '  he 
was  a  free  agent,  capable  of  self-government,  and 
held  responsible  for  a  life  of  obedience.' ' 

The  doctrine,  then,  clearly  is,  that  Adam  was  a 
free  moral  agent  in  respect  to  all  duties,  yet  under 
a  dispensation  which  insured  him  against  the  viola- 
tion of  all  except  one.  Now  we  are  free  to  confess 
that  we  cannot  see  how  both  these  things  can  be 
true.  No  man  can  be  at  the  same  time  morally 
free,  and  yet  be  by  some  external  power  prevented 
from  moral  dereliction.  The  "  security  of  heaven," 
to  which  Dr.  Harris,  as  we  have  before  seen,  com- 
pares the  state  of  the  first  man,  guarded  from  sin 
without  violation  of  free  agency,  consists  in  the 
inherent,  self-sustaining  strength  of  the  beings  who 
remain  untouched  by  sin,  and  is  consistent  with 
their  free  agency,  because  it  results  from  the  con- 
stant exercise  of  that  free  agency.  There  is  no 
resemblance  between  this  and  the  supposed  condi- 
tion of  Adam,  protected  not  by  his  own  inherent 


DIFFICULTIES  AND  THEIR  SOLUTION.          251 

moral  strength  and  preference,  but  by  some  spell  or 
influence  from  without,  from  yielding  to  temptation. 
It  is  impossible  to  conceive  of  any  species  of  "  spe- 
cial influence  "  whereby  the  Holy  Spirit  could  secure 
Adam's  general  obedience  consistently  with  his  free 
agency.  Besides,  to  say  that  he  remained  a  free 
agent  in  respect  to  other  matters,  implies  a  respon- 
sibility connected  therewith,  that  he  was  (either 
personally  or  federally)  on  trial  with  relation  thereto. 
To  make  a  single  test  his  sole  condition  of  accept- 
ance, is  either  to  discharge  him  from  all  others, 
which  leaves  him  without  a  moral  responsibility  and 
trial,  or  to  guarantee  him  against  all  other  tempta- 
tions,—  i.  e.,  to  prevent  him  from  exercising  free 
agency  in  any  other  matter, — which  is  to  that  extent 
to  annihilate  free  agency.  Says  Dr.  Payne,  "  Im- 
munity from  temptation,  or  from  the  possibility  of 
being  vanquished  by  it,  is  utterly  incompatible  with 
a  state  of  moral  trial  "  ; *  and  again,  "  a  being  sus- 
tained by  sovereign  effectual  grace  cannot  be  in  a 
state  of  probation."  2 

To  say,  then,  that  but  one  condition  of  accept- 
ance was  imposed  upon  man,  yet  that  he  still  con- 
tinued subject  to  many  obligations,  is  not  a  mystery 
but  a  contradiction.  Equally  so,  that  he  was  a  free 
moral  agent,  (i.  e.,  uninfluenced  from  without,  and 
on  full  moral  trial,)  and  yet  was  specially  secured 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  with  relation  to  all  points  but 
one,  so  that,  except  as  to  that  point,  he  was  not  free 

1  Payne's  Lectures  on  Original  Sin,  p.  349.  3  Ibid.  p.  75. 


252  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

and  not  on  trial.  We  have  seen  that  the  difficulty 
is  not  avoided  by  the  Edwards  theory,  that  Adam 
was  individually  accountable  as  to  his  general  du- 
ties, and  federally  accountable  as  to  this  particular 
interdict ;  that  in  relation  to  his  personal  duties  he 
was  specially  guarded,  but  that  in  relation  to  his 
representative  duty  he  was  left  to  himself;  in  other 
words,  that  he  was  a  free  agent  only  as  respected 
the  special  prohibition,  and  in  his  federal  capacity. 
Apart  from  the  fact  that  this  does  not  relieve  the 
difficulty,  we  may  inquire,  with  regard  to  the  view 
itself,  what  Scripture  ground  is  there  for  it  ?  Where 
is  the  least  suggestion  of  such  a  distinction  ?  or  any 
recognition  of  it,  either  before  or  after  the  disobe- 
dience ?  Where  is  the  probability  of  it  ?  for  why 
should  Adam  be  so  carefully  protected  as  respected 
his  personal  welfare,  and  be  left  exposed  as  to  the 
vastly  more  important  interests  of  the  race  ?  More- 
over, supposing  Adam  to  have  delayed  or  refrained 
from  partaking  of  the  forbidden  fruit,  how  long, 
upon  this  view,  were  this  arrangement  and  his  per- 
sonal exemption  from  moral  liability  and  free  agency 
to  continue  ?  The  view  seems  to  consider  his  per- 
sonal free  agency,  at  some  time  of  his  life,  as  essen- 
tial ;  —  when  was  it  to  be  resumed  ?  And  after  its 
resumption,  if  ever,  should  Adam  happen  to  sin 
personally,  but  never  federally,  or  conversely,  how 
was  he  to  be  punished,  and  in  what  way  would  his 
posterity  be  affected  ?  If  there  is  enough  in  the 
narrative  to  suggest  any  such  complex  arrangement 


DIFFICULTIES  AND  THEIR  SOLUTION.          253 

as  the  view  asserts,  there  must  be  enough  to  suggest 
some  hints  in  reply  to  these  inquiries.  We  think, 
however,  it  must  be  evident  that  the  scheme  itself 
is  only  an  ingenious  but  improbable  invention,  to- 
tally devoid  of  authority. 

The  difficulty,  then,  which  we  are  considering, 
meets  us  irresistibly,  either  alone  or  in  concert  with 
others,  upon  any  theory  which  views  Adam  as  a 
moral  agent  before  the  transgression.  'It  yields  only 
with  the  relinquishment  of  this  idea,  but  then  it 
yields  entirely.  There  is  then  seen  to  be  no  vari- 
ance between  the  plain  teaching  of  the  Word,  that 
but  one  command  was  laid  upon  man  as  law  for  his 
obedience,  and  that  that  was  made  the  pivot  of  his 
moral  destiny,  and  the  equally  plain  dictate  of  rea- 
son, that  a  moral  being  must  be  subject  to  the  whole 
moral  law,  —  as  fully  free  to  break  it  as  he  is  free 
and  accountable  to  keep  it  in  all  its  provisions. 

It  may  be  worth  remarking  here,  as  a  feature  of 
improbability  in  the  common  view,  that  it  exhibits 
Adam,  whose  natural  disposition  for  holiness  and 
constant  association  with  God  fitted  him  to  endure 
a  far  more  severe  probationary  test  than  his  poster- 
ity, as  subjected  to  one  which  is  singularly  insignifi- 
cant, while  his  descendants,  weak,  corrupted,  and 
environed  with  sin  and  sinful  influences,  are  placed 
for  their  trial  under  the  manifold  requirements  of 
the  whole  moral  law,  and  left  to  combat  with  every 
conceivable  temptation.  If  the  conditions  imposed 
upon  us  be  no  more  difficult  than  moral  beings  re- 


254  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

quire,  why  was  the  first  man  shielded  from  these 
and  admitted  to  less  ?  If  the  test  applied  to  Adam 
were  sufficient,  why  are  we  subjected  to  one  of  so 
much  greater  severity  ?  The  purpose  of  any  pro- 
bationary trial  is  (probare)  to  prove  the  moral  firm- 
ness of  the  creature,  and  to  strengthen  his  moral 
powers  by  discipline  and  exercise.  It  would  seem, 
then,  that  he  who  has  the  greatest  original  advan- 
tages should  encounter  the  most  arduous  trial,  and 
that  he  who  has  the  fewest  aids  to  success  should 
be  most  easily  dealt  with.  It  has  been  replied,  in- 
deed, to  this  objection,  that  in  the  case  of  Adam, 
who  was,  at  least  in  this  matter,  the  representative 
not  only  of  himself  but  the  race,  the  test  was  pur- 
posely made  insignificant,  in  order  that  he  (and 
through  him  the  race)  might  have  the  greatest  pos- 
sible chance  of  success  and  of  after-acceptance  and 
blessedness.  It  is  surely,  however,  a  sufficient  an- 
swer to  such  a  position,  that  the  very  insignificance 
of  the  test  must  have  also  destroyed  its  value.  If 
it  were  intended  to  be  sole  and  final,  as  respected 
Adam  or  the  race,  what  would  have  been  estab- 
lished or  effected  had  Adam  succeeded  in  abiding 
it  ?  So  slight  a  victory  would  neither  have  proved 
man's  moral  fidelity,  nor  have  availed  as  a  means  of 
his  moral  development.  When  God  tempted  Abra- 
ham, it  was  with  no  easy  trial,  and  surely  Adam 
should  have  been  as  secure  in  virtue  as  the  patri- 
arch, his  "  degenerate "  descendant.  But  if  the 
test  were  not  intended  to  be  sole  and  final,  but  only 


DIFFICULTIES  AND  THEIR  SOLUTION.          255 

preliminary  to  successive  and  more  difficult  trials, 
then  of  course  this  particular  experiment  could  not 
have  been  the  turning-point  of  man's  moral  destiny, 
according  to  the  universal  doctrine,  as  well  as  the 
clear  import  of  Revelation  itself.  Thus,  at  every 
turn,  we  encounter  objections  to  be  avoided  only  by 
returning  to  our  starting-point,  and  taking  a  differ- 
ent path  from  the  outset. 

We  may  also  remark,  that  in  the  foregoing  con- 
siderations we  touch  the  ground  of  certain  com- 
plainings which  the  received  view  of  Adam's  trans- 
gression and  fall  has  awakened  among  men  in  all 
ages,  against  their  Maker  and  his  moral  system. 
How  often  do  we  hear  objectors  complain  that  God 
has  made  an  unreasonable  difference  between  them 
and  Adam,  as  respects  their  opportunities  of  accept- 
ance and  life  !  —  that  Adam's  posterity  have  never 
had  so  favorable  terms  of  probation  as  he,  and  that 
God  did  not  deal  fairly  by  the  race  in  making 
Adam  their  federal  head,  since  there  must  have 
been  in  him  a  special  deficiency  of  moral  firmness, 
to  have  so  easily  fallen  !  "  Why,"  they  will  say,  — 
"  why  was  not  some  Abraham  first  created  and 
deputed  to  encounter  for  the  race  this  test,  so  easy 
in  itself,  yet  so  momentous  in  its  consequences  ? 
Nay,  why  should  not  I  myself  have  been  offered  a 
similar  trial ;  for  it  surely  seems  hard  that  I  should 
be  ruined  by  Adam's  failure  in  a  trial  which  it 
seems  incredible  that  /  could  not  have  endured  ?  " 
Thus  has  grown  up  in  human  hearts  an  unfilial 
feeling  of  bitterness  not  only  toward  God,  but  to- 


256  THE   RISE   AND  THE  FALL. 

ward  our  first  progenitor ;  and,  indeed,  it  does  seem 
unaccountable  that  the  normal  man,  fresh  from  the 
hands  and  society  of  God,  should  not  have  been  able 
to  withstand  a  temptation  far  less  trying  than  many 
which  thousands  of  his  "  depraved  "  descendants 
have  triumphantly  resisted.  No  less  reasonable, 
also,  in  one  point  of  view  does  it  appear,  to  expect 
that  God  should  permit  all  men  to  enter  upon  pro- 
bation on  uniform  terms  and  under  equally  favorable 
conditions.  And  it  is  therefore  worthy  of  notice, 
that  of  all  the  complaints  and  cavils  to  which  we 
have  alluded  our  view  finally  disposes.  It  exhibits 
the  transgression  not  as  an  act  of  moral  weakness 
and  folly  —  at  once  imbecile  and  disastrous.  It 
represents  it  as  an  act  which  any  being  in  Adam's 
situation  would  have  undoubtedly  committed,  —  an 
act  not  sinful  nor  necessarily  productive  of  sin,  and 
not  intrinsically  evil  to  mankind ;  but  one,  on  the 
contrary,  which  elevated  man  in  the  moral  scale, 
and  opened  to  him  opportunities  of  exaltation  and 
glory  otherwise  unattainable.  It  reveals,  too,  the 
fact  that  no  difference  has  been  made  between  Adam 
and  ourselves  in  the  terms  of  probation,  unless  in 
our  favor  ;  for  it  shows  him  entering  upon  his  moral 
career,  after  the  transgression,  with  precisely  the 
same  nature  and  under  the  same  obligations  as  every 
other  being  of  the  succeeding  race ;  and  that  the 
only  difference  between  him  and  ourselves,  in  moral 
circumstances,  is  found  in  the  vastly  greater  advan- 
tages by  which  we  are  surrounded,  to  attract  and 
keep  us  in  the  path  of  rectitude. 


COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED.       257 


CHAPTER  ITL 

THE  COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED  WITH 
RESPECT  TO  THE  METHOD  OF  ITS  INFLUENCE  UPON 
THE  RACE. 

ANOTHER  recommendation  of  the  view  which  we 
urge  is,  that  it  simply  and  comprehensibly  explains 
the  nature  and  method  of  that  radical  change  in 
man  which  is  universally  agreed  to  have  taken  place 
at  the  disobedience.  It  has  been  generally  insisted 
that  this  change  was  some  kind  of  a  "fall," — a  de- 
terioration or  prejudice  of  some  sort,  —  sustained  by 
Adam  and  transmitted  to  his  posterity,  either  in  his 
nature,  character,  or  relations  to  God.  We  propose 
to  examine  this  doctrine,  and  to  show,  if  possible, 
that  no  such  deterioration  or  "  fall  "  can  be  believed 
to  have  attended  the  act  of  transgression,  as  a  result 

O  * 

involved  in  its  commission.  We  do  not  deny,  as 
we  have  before  intimated,  that  there  was  a  fall  by 
Adam,  subsequently  to  and  independently  of  the 
disobedience,  into  sinfulness  and  alienation  from 
God,  —  the  same  "fall"  or  "apostasy,"  in  fact, 
of  which  every  one  of  his  descendants  has  been 
individually  guilty.  The  "  fall,"  against  the  prob- 
ability of  whose  occurrence  we  shall  offer  some  con- 
siderations, is  such  an  one  as  the  common  view 
17 


258         THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

supposes  to  have  been  associated  with  and  effected 
by  the  act  of  transgression  itself. 

Let  us  inquire  in  the  outset,  "  Wherein  consisted 
that  supposed  *  change  for  the  worse '  in  man's  con- 
dition, alleged  to  have  occurred  at  and  through  the 
disobedience  ?  "  The  number  and  diversity  of  the 
replies  furnished  to  this  inquiry  by  the  different 
schools  of  Theology,  of  themselves  indicate  the 
difficulty  contained  in  it.  One  party  insists  that 
by  the  transgression  man  lost  all  "  natural  ability  " 
(i.  e.,  all  inherent  power)  to  keep  the  law  of  God. 
Another  declares  that  by  it  he  only  lost  the  "  moral 
ability  "  to  keep  it ;  meaning  thereby  that  the  dis- 
obedience, without  taking  away  man's  power  of 
obedience,  effected  such  a  loss  of  disposition  thereto 
as  rendered  it  certain  that  he  never  would  entirely 
submit  to  its  requirements.  But  these,  after  all, 
are  rather  statements  of  effects  than  of  the  mode. 
The  question  still  recurs,  what  was  the  change  in 
man  which  left  him  thus  naturally  or  morally  un- 
able to  keep  the  law  ?  That  no  satisfactory  reply 
has  ever  been  made  to  this  is  evident  from  the  fact 
that  it  is  still  as  much  as  ever  a  subject  of  dispute 
and  discussion.  Perhaps  the  most  rational  and  in- 
telligible answer,  however,  that  has  been  offered,  is 
contained  in  a  theory  already  alluded  to ;  that,  in 
consequence  of  the  disobedience,  God  withdrew 
his  Holy  Spirit  from  man,  who  had  been  thereto- 
fore under  its  influence,  and  so  left  him  without 
"  spiritual  life  "  and  the  restraining  power  of  the 


COMMON"  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED.       259 

Divine  indwelling,  against  the  assaults  of  sin.1  To 
the  same  effect  Dr.  Bushnell  says :  "  It  is  not  that 
man  fell  away  from  certain  moral  notions  or  laws, 
but  it  is  that  he  fell  away  from  the  personal  inhabi- 
tation of  God,  lost  inspiration,  and  so  became  a 
dark,  enslaved  creature,  alienated,  as  the  Apostle 
says,  from  the  life  of  God."2  This  seems  clear 
and  explicit,  and  partly  satisfies  our  inquiry.  Yet 
we  still  are  constrained  to  ask,  What  happened  to 
man,  that  caused  God  thus  to  withdraw  his  Holy 
Spirit  from  him,  to  cease  his  personal  inhabitation, 
to  deprive  his  creature  of  "  spiritual  life  "  ?  There 
must  have  been  some  reason  for  so  sad  and  fatal  a 
visitation,  and  what  was  that  reason  ? 

It  is  urged,  indeed,  by  some  of  the  advocates  of 
the  particular  doctrine  in  question,  that  these  spirit- 
ual blessings,  of  which  Adam  and  the  race  are 

O     7 

supposed  to  have  been  thus  deprived,  were  "  char- 
tered privileges  "  ; 3  meaning  thereby  advantages 
'  not  naturally  or  originally  pertaining  to  humanity, 
and  specially  granted  only  on  certain  conditions ;  so 
that  on  the  breach  of  these  they  might  be  with- 
drawn without  injustice  and  without  prejudice  to 
the  race,  since  men  were  not  thereby  placed  in  any 
lower  or  worse  condition  than  if  this  special  oppor- 
tunity had  never  been  permitted.  Yet,  even  upon 
this  theory,  unless  this  experiment  with  Adam  were 


1  Payne's  Lectures  on  Original  Sin,  p.  144. 

2  Sermons  on  the  New  Life,  p.  36. 

8  Payne's  Lectures  on  Original  Sin. 


260  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

totally  without  meaning  and  without  purpose,  we 
must  suppose  that  there  was  some  real  and  neces- 
sary connection  between  his  transgression  and  the 
withdrawal  from  him  of  these  "  chartered  blessings," 
so  called.  Doubtless  when  conferred  it  was  the 
sincere  desire  of  the  Giver  that  they  should  be 
preserved  by  man.  Is  it  conceivable,  then,  that 
their  continuance  was  made  to  depend  upon  some- 
thing which  had  not,  in  itself,  the  slightest  bearing 
upon  it  ?  If  not,  why  was  Adam's  disobedience 
incompatible  with  this  continuance  ?  Why,  and 
from  what  motive,  were  they  withdrawn  when  this 
disobedience  occurred,  and  never  again  offered  to 
the  race  ?  These  are  the  questions  which  we  pur- 
pose to  investigate. 

Obviously,  this  final  withdrawal  of  blessings  from 
the  race,  in  the  manner  supposed,  must  have  been 
either  the  direct  act  of  God,  not  necessarily  occa- 
sioned by  the  transgression,  or  the  necessary  effect 
of  the  transgression  itself.  If  the  direct  and  un- 
necessary act  of  God,  it  must  have  been  either  with 
displeasure  or  without  displeasure  ;  and  in  this  latter 
case  it  must  have  been  intended  either  for  man's 
benefit,  or  have  been  without  any  reason  at  all. 
But  inasmuch  as  the  withdrawal  was,  by  the  hy- 
pothesis, a  great  loss  and  evil  to  mankind,  and  inas- 
much as  God  cannot  be  believed  to  have  acted  from 
mere  caprice,  the  last  suggestion  may  be  dismissed, 
and  we  may  consider  the  supposition  that  the  with- 
drawal was  the  unnecessary  act  of  God,  merely 


COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED.      261 

from  displeasure  at  Adam's  disobedience  to  his 
command.  We  should,  perhaps,  be  less  likely  to 
discuss  this  at  length,  but  as  it  closely  borders  upon 
a  view  supported  by  some  theologians,  that  man- 
kind by  the  fall  fell  into  a  state  of  disfavor  with 
God  (though  without  explaining  the  nature  of  that 
disfavor),  and  as  the  same  considerations  will  apply 
to  both  hypotheses,  we  shall  consider  it  somewhat 
fully. 

Was  this  final  withdrawal,  then,  (or  this  disfa- 
vor,) occasioned  by  a  mere  feeling  of  Divine  anger 
at  this  personal  act  of  Adam,  —  a  feeling  extending 
from  him  to  his  posterity;  so  that  although  there 
was  no  inherent  obstacle  to  the  continuance  of  his 
former  blessings  (or  favor),  yet,  in  consequence  of 
this  displeasure,  they  were  forever  withdrawn  both 
from  Adam  and  his  race  ?  It  will  be  readily  seen 
that  were  this  supposed  displeasure  and  its  conse- 
quences confined  to  Adam,  there  would  be  little 
difficulty  in  accepting  an  affirmative  answer.  The 
trouble  arises  from  the  doctrine  that  they  extend  to 
his  future  race  in  all  generations,  who  had  no  par- 
ticipation with  him  in  the  guilty  act.  If  this  be 
true,  then,  unless  we  believe  that  such  divine  dis- 
pleasure against  Adam's  posterity  on  account  of  his 
act  was  without  reason  on  the  part  of  God,  (a  doc- 
trine out  of  the  question,)  we  must  account  in  some 
way  for  its  existence,  and  there  are  but  two  methods 
of  doing  so.  Either  it  is  because  they  are  his  pos- 
terity, though  not  in  any  sense  responsible  for  his 


262  THE  RISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

sin,  or  because  they  are  regarded  by  God  as  impli- 
cated in  the  guilt  of  his  disobedience. 

That  God  does  not  cherish  displeasure  or  disfavor 
against  us  for  Adam's  act,  simply  because  we  are 
his  descendants,  while  admitting  that  we  are  in  no 
way  responsible  for  his  conduct,  we  ought  not  to  feel 
obliged  to  argue.  Such  a  displeasure  would  be  a 
mere  resentment,  alike  unphilosophical  and  unjust. 
That  God  would  harbor  such  vindictiveness  toward 
a  race  of  innocent  beings,  simply  because  they  were 
that  which  He  himself  had  made  them,  thus  pun- 
ishing them  for  his  own  act,  is  utterly  incredible 
and  revolting.  Apart  from  its  intrinsic  impossibil- 
ity, God  himself  expressly  declares  that  he  does 
not  punish  the  children  for  the  sins  of  their  fathers, 
though  undoubtedly,  under  the  inflexible  laws  of 
his  material  universe,  the  natural  consequences  of 
sin  may  extend  beyond  the  perpetrator.  Nor  is  the 
injustice  implied  in  such  a  view  the  only  argument 
against  it.  We  are  led  to  inquire  why,  if  God 
foresaw  that  the  whole  human  race  were  to  be  thus 
displeasing  to  him,  he  did  not  refrain  either  from 
their  original  creation  or  from  their  continuance 
after  the  transgression  of  Adam.  It  can  hardly  be 
believed  that  he  would  preserve  the  existence  of 
a  race  in  which  every  new  birth  awakened  new 
sentiments  of  disfavor  and  displeasure. 

Is,  then,  this  imagined  displeasure  of  God  against 
us  on  account  of  Adam's  act,  because  he  holds  us 
responsible  for  it,  or  implicated  in  its  guilt  ?  If  it 


COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED.      263 

be  so,  either  man  must  be  regarded  as  having  (by 
virtue  of  his  descent)  participated  with  Adam  in 
his  act  of  disobedience  ;  or  else,  by  virtue  of  that 
descent,  the  guilt  of  that  act  must  be  imputed  to 
him,  though  he  be  not  regarded  as  having  partici- 
pated in  the  act  of  transgression.  We  confess  that  in 
stating  these  propositions,  which  we  do  because  they 
form  received  topics  of  theological  discussion,  the 
obscurity  which  would  be  admitted  to  invest  them 
were  they  anything  but  theological  dogmas,  does 
not  seem  to  us  much  relieved  by  the  fact  that  they 
are  such.  But  to  consider  them  fairly  and  in  their 
order  :  It  is  perfectly  manifest  that,  if  our  descent 
from  Adam  identifies  us  in  any  way  with  his  act  as 
participators  in  it,  then  such  participation  consists 
in  or  arises  from  the  fact  of  such  descent,  —  some- 
thing, therefore,  of  which  God  alone  is  the  author. 
Consequently,  if  he  may  be  justly  displeased  with 
us  and  hold  us  responsible  as  participators,  he 
should  also  be  displeased  with  himself,  for  at  least 
sharing  in  such  participation.  If  he  is  not  so  dis- 
pleased with  himself,  then  he  cannot  be  with  us ; 
and  if  he  is  so  displeased,  then  follows  the  absurd- 
ity that,  having  been  pleased  to  create  us  and  being 
displeased  that  we  are  created,  he  is  both  pleased 
and  displeased  at  the  same  thing.  We  need  not 
dwell  on  a  proposition  which  leads  to  such  conclu- 
sions ;  and  therefore  turn  to  the  inquiry  whether, 
by  virtue  of  our  descent  from  Adam,  the  guilt  of 
his  act  is  imputed  to  us,  though  not  participating  in 


264  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

the  act.  As  the  advocates  of  this  view  themselves 
admit  it  to  be  "  a  mystery,"  we  shall  not  be  ex- 
pected to  see  plainly  the  method  or  the  justice  of 
thus  imputing  guilt  to  perfect  innocence.  But  it  is 
evident  that  this  proposition,  though  in  a  different 
form  from  the  last,  is  substantially  the  same  thing. 
For  if  this  "  imputation  "  is  in  consequence  of  our 
descent  from  Adam,  then  it  is  this  descent  which 
constitutes  our  guilt.  In  other  words,  we  are  held 
guilty  for  the  act  of  God  himself.  God  then  shares 
in  the  guilt  of  Adam's  sin,  and,  being  holy  in  all 
his  acts,  is  both  holy  and  guilty  at  the  same  time. 
Such  are  some  of  the  inconsistencies  in  which  the 
doctrine  of  God's  displeasure  with,  or  disfavor  to- 
ward the  posterity  of  Adam,  on  account  of  his  trans- 
gression, involve  us.  It  seems  incredible,  therefore, 
that  this  supposed  final  withdrawal  from  the  race 
of  the  blessings  previously  enjoyed  by  it,  could 
have  been  the  unnecessary  act  of  God.  We  now 
proceed  to  inquire  whether  it  resulted  as  a  neces- 
sary consequence  of  the  transgression  itself. 

Did,  then,  this  "  deprivation  "  ensue,  as  is  more 
commonly  and  rationally  believed,  because  by  the 
disobedience  some  change  had  occurred  in  Adam 
(to  be  by  natural  transmission  perpetuated  in  his 
descendants),  impairing  and  corrupting  his  mind 
and  character ;  unfitting  man,  therefore,  for  God's 
personal  inhabitation  ;  of  itself  excluding  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  so  destroying  "  spiritual  life  "  in  the 
soul  ?  If  this  be  so,  —  if  the  relations  either  of 


COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED.      265 

Adam  alone  or  of  man  in  general  were  really  prej- 
udiced by  the  disobedience,  —  if  that  act  of  itself 
tended  to  separate  the  race  from  God,  it  must  have 
been  by  producing  some  radical  and  permanent  de- 
terioration, either  in  the  actual  moral  character  of 
mankind,  or  in  those  qualities  of  the  mind  which 
lie  at  the  basis  of  character  and  go  to  its  formation. 
Let  us  see,  therefore,  how  far  these  suppositions 
respectively  are  admissible. 

That  this  act  so  impaired  the  moral  character  of 
man  (irrespective  of  any  change  in  his  faculties  or 
disposition)  that  God  could  no  longer  abide  in  his 
soul,  —  in  other -words,  such  that  had  no  other  sin 
been  ever  committed  by  Adam  or  by  any  of  his 
descendants,  and  this  particular  sin  been  fully  for- 
given by  the  Creator,  still  the  corruption  left  by 
this  single  act  would  have  tainted  men  in  all  gener- 
ations and  rendered  them  unacceptable  to  God,  has 
been  sometimes  inculcated.  Thus  the  Westminster 
Catechism  teaches  that  "the  sinfulness  of  that  estate 
whereinto  man  fell  consists  in  the  guilt  of  Adam's 
first  sin,  the  want  of  original  righteousness,  and  the 
corruption  of  the  whole  nature,  which  is  commonly 
called  original  sin."  How  far  Adam's  descendants 
can  be  justly  held  accountable  for  his  personal  act, 
we  have  already  considered  :  at  present  we  confine 
ourselves  to  the  latter  part  of  the  proposition,  which 
speaks  of  the  want  of  original  righteousness  and 
the  corruption  of  the  whole  nature,  as  being  them- 
selves of  the  nature  of  "  sw,"  an^  implies  that  every 


266  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

man  comes  into  the  world,  not  merely  destitute  of 
"  original "  (i.  e.,  native)  holiness  of  character,  but 
with  an  "  original "  character  of  sinfulness,  even 
before  he  has  thought,  spoken,  or  acted.  "  Charac- 
ter," then,  in  the  sense  here  used,  means  something 
separate  from  "  disposition"  or  "  tendencies."  Prop- 
erly, it  is  the  moral  tone,  or  hue,  which  invests  a 
man's  life,  thoughts,  or  actions.  It  is  absolutely 
requisite  for  its  existence,  therefore,  that  there 
should  be  moral  faculties  already  existing,  as  well 
as  life  and  acts,  —  for  a  brute  has  no  character,  nor 
an  idiot,  nor  a  man  that  never  thought  or  acted ; 
while  "  disposition  "  may  exist  in  the  brute  or  the 
idiot,  entirely  separate  from  moral  agency.  By  the 
proposition  of  the  Westminster  Catechism  just  stated, 
however,  man  possesses  a  character  before  he  enters 
on  moral  agency,  —  a  character  anterior  to  moral 
agency,  and  anterior,  therefore,  to  the  possible  com- 
mencement of  character,  which  is  absurd.  In  fact, 
the  principle  that  man  can  have  no  character  except 
through  acts  in  which  he  personally  participates,  is 
one  too  plain  to  need  discussion.  It  is  universally 
recognized  in  the  ordinary  affairs  and  judgments  of 
life,  and  is  questioned  nowhere  except  in  the  domain 
of  theology,  and  survives  even  there  in  connection 
with  no  other  subject  than  this  transgression  of 
Adam.  Probably  it  would  have  forsaken  this  re- 
treat also,  were  it  not  retained  as  a  refuge  from 
other  difficulties  of  greater  magnitude,  which  the 
ordinary  view  must  encounter  in  its  absence  ;  —  a 


COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED.      267 

necessity  which  should  excite  suspicion  of  the  theory 
which  is  compelled  to  resort  to  it. 

If,  then,  this  supposed  deterioration  or  fall  of 
man  was  not  of  the  nature  of  a  change  in  his  moral 

O 

character,  apart  from  his  disposition,  will,  or  action, 
it  must  have  been  in  the  disposition  or  will  them- 
selves, —  that  is,  in  those  mental  qualities  or  facul- 
ties which  are  concerned  in  the  determination  of 
conduct  and  character.  Such  alteration,  if  it  oc- 
curred, was  necessarily  either  by  the  absolute  or 
relative  weakening  of  the  will,  rendering  man  to 
that  degree  incapable  of  rendering  perfect  obedi- 
ence ;  or  in  such  loss  of  disposition  thereto,  as  ren- 
dered him  thenceforward  unwilling  to  render  such 
obedience,  —  that  is,  a  change  from  both  a  natural 
and  moral  ability  for  holiness,  to  a  natural  or  moral 
inability,  or  both.  In  what  way,  then,  could  any 
such  change  have  been  produced  ?  Evidently  it 
could  have  been  effected  only  either  by  a  supernat- 
ural or  a  natural  process  of  mental  alteration ;  — 
that  is,  either  through  the  direct  interposition  of  the 
Creator,  acting  upon  the  mind  thus  to  impair  and 
degrade  its  properties  and  powers,  or  as  an  ordinary 
and  necessary  consequence  of  the  state  or  condition 
in  which  the  mind  was  at  the  time  of  the  trans- 
gression. That  it  was  not  the  former,  we  need 
hardly  insist.  That  God  would  deliberately  mar 
his  own  work,  no  intrinsic  necessity  existing  for  it, 
is  incredible.  "  Previous  to  the  disobedience,"  says 
a  recent  writer,  "Adam  appreciated  the  perfections 


268  THE  RISE  AXD  THE  FALL. 

of  God  and  loved  his  attractions.  After  that  act, 
these  perfections  presented  no  loveliness,  elicited  no 
affections.  Light,  and  love,  and  filial  trust,  yielded 
to  darkness,  enmity,  error,  and  despair !  This  could 
not  have  been  effected  by  the  direct  act  of  God. 
It  is  impossible  to  conceive  that  Jehovah  did  or 
could  deface  the  spiritual  beauty  with  which  He 
himself  had  adorned  the  soul  of  Adam."  *  To  have 
done  so,  we  may  add,  and  to  have  inflicted  upon 
man  a  mental  and  moral  prostration,  rendering  him 
more  liable  than  before  to  sin,  and  inevitably  de- 
termining his  subjection  by  evil,  —  a  condition  to 
which  his  own  act  would  not  have  naturally  reduced 
him,  —  would  have  been  to  relieve  him  of  the  chief 
share  of  responsibility  for  the  prevalence  of  sin  in 
the  world,  since  such  prevalence  would  have  been 
then  attributable,  not  to  man's  disobedience,  but  to 
God's  intervention.  We  must  conclude,  therefore, 
that  whatever  evil  effects  upon  the  human  mind 
were  produced  by  the  transgression  were  natural 
effects  alone. 

These  natural  effects,  as  we  have  before  sug- 
gested, must  have  consisted  in  either  the  absolute 
or  relative  weakening  of  the  will  or  disposition,  as 
respected  resistance  to  evil ;  and  must  have  been 
either  a  natural  diminution  of  power  in  the  will  or 
disposition,  or  a  natural  augmentation  of  strength 
in  the  appetites  and  passions,  or  a  natural  deprecia- 
tion of  the  influence  exerted  upon  the  will  or  dis- 

1  Payne's  Lectures,  p.  144. 


COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED.       269 

position  by  the  moral  faculty.  Let  us  consider, 
first,  whether  it  could  have  consisted  in  a  mere 
natural  accession  of  new  force  to  the  propensities, 
or  a  mere  natural  enervation  of  the  disposition  or 
will. 

We  submit  that  it  cannot  be  placed  upon  either 
of  these  grounds,  because,  — 

1st  The  change  supposed  to  have  been  produced 
was  by  far  too  immediate  and  too  great  to  be  as- 
cribed to  any  such  naturally  produced  "  tendency  to 
repetition,"  1  as  the  commission  of  all  acts  creates. 
This  "  tendency  to  repetition,"  —  in  other  words^ 
"  the  influence  of  habit,"  —  is  not  one  that  becomes 
suddenly  manifest,  since  an  act  must  have  been  done 
a  considerable  number  of  times  before  it  is  felt  as 
a  "  habit."  That  a  single  commission  tends  to  the 
formation  of  a  habit,  cannot  be  disputed,  just  as  it 
cannot  be  denied  that  a  drop  of  water  must  raise 
the  level  of  the  lake,  but  the  truth  is  recognized 
rather  by  the  reason  than  the  senses,  so  slight  is  the 
actual  result.  "  As  the  snow  gathers  together,  so 
are  our  habits  formed.  No  single  flake  that  is  added 
to  the  pile  produces  a  sensible  change  ;  no  single 
action  creates,  however  it  may  exhibit,  a  man's 
character ;  but  as  the  tempest  hurls  the  avalanche 
down  the  mountain  and  overwhelms  the  inhabitant 
and  his  habitation,  so  passion,  acting  upon  the  ele- 
ments of  mischief,  which  pernicious  habits  have 
brought  together  by  imperceptible  accumulation, 

l  Harris's  Man  Primeval. 


270  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

may  overthrow  the  edifice  of  truth  and  virtue."  1 
Hence  the  effect  of  habit  can  only  be  exhibited  after 
time  and  repetition ;  and  should  repetition  never 
occur,  no  appreciable  force  or  influence  will  have 
been  created.  Indeed,  it  not  unfrequently  happens 
that  the  commission  of  an  act,  so  far  from  inciting 
to  repetition,  actually  deters  from  it,  in  view  of  the 
remorse  and  distress,  or  other  evils  which  follow  as 
its  consequence.  This  would  certainly  seem  as 
likely  to  be  the  result  in  the  case  of  holy  beings  as 
in  any  other;  and  the  idea  is  confirmed  by  our 
observations  of  human  character,  so  far  as  we  can 
derive  instruction  from  them. 

2d.  The  various  appetites,  like  other  mental  fac- 
ulties or  properties,  are,  to  a  considerable  extent, 
distinct  from  each  other,  and  are,  for  the  most  part, 
affected,  each  for  itself,  independently  of  the  rest, 
and  only  by  their  respective  gratifications.  In  other 
words,  the  indulgence  of  one  propensity  does  not 
ordinarily  foster  or  strengthen  another  of  an  entirely 
different  character.  If  this  be  questioned,  as  re- 
spects the  effect  of  habitual  indulgence,  it  is  suffi- 
cient for  our  purpose  to  confine  our  proposition  to 
that  of  a  single  vicious  gratification.  We  think  it 
will  hardly  be  claimed  that  a  man's  single  and  only 
act  of  intemperance  has  left  him  more  cruel  or  more 
deceitful  than  he  was  before  he  committed  it.  Now, 
if  it  be  admitted  that  Adam's  transgression  was 
prompted  by  some  evil  appetite  or  desire,  even  this, 

1  Bentham. 


COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED.       271 

though  it  might  explain  an  augmentation  of  that 
particular  propensity,  would  not  account  for  what  is 
alleged  to  have  resulted,  —  the  entire  corruption  of 
his  whole  heart  and  being.  It  is  allowing  much, 
even  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  that  the  single 
and  slight  outbreak  of  passion  here  described  (sup- 
posing it  to  be  such)  could  give  that  particular  pro- 
pensity a  preponderating  influence  in  the  human 
heart  for  all  generations.  It  is  far  more  than  reason 
or  experience  will  admit,  that  such  an  act  could,  by 
a  mere  natural  consequence,  place  at  once  and  for- 
ever the  whole  tribe  of  evil  passions  upon  the  throne 
of  human  character. 

3d.  Had  the  transgression  simply  produced  a 
merely  natural  growth  or  development  of  appetite, 
or  a  merely  natural  effect  upon  the  disposition  or 
will  of  the  race  descending  from  Adam,  as  yet  in 
his  loins,  the  same  results  must  have  been  conse- 
quent upon  any  other  evil  indulgence  of  any  other 
evil  propensity.  This  is  manifest.  Yet  the  narra- 
tive plainly  teaches  that  the  effects  of  the  disobe- 
dience depended  upon  that  particular  act,  and  no 
other  ;  and  that  no  different  violation  of  duty,  how- 
ever flagrant,  could  or  would  have  been  followed  by 
the  same  consequences.  This  fact  alone  seems  fatal 
to  the  idea  that  the  supposed  "  deterioration  "  or 
"  fall,"  in  man's  condition,  whatever  it  may  be  im- 
agined to  have  been,  could  have  consisted  in  any 
natural  change  produced  by  the  transgression,  at 
least  in  any  of  his  intellectual  faculties. 


272  THE  RISE  AND   THE   FALL. 

We  come  next  to  inquire  whether  man's  moral 
sense,  or  his  conscience,  may  not  have  been  en- 
feebled or  blunted,  either  in  its  energies  or  its  in- 
fluence over  human  conduct,  through  which  loss  of 
power  or  influence  the  race  became  thenceforth  less 
able  to  cope  successfully  with  its  own  inherent  ten- 
dencies to  self-indulgence. 

In  reply  to  this  portion  of  our  inquiry,  we  may 
refer  to  substantially  the  same  considerations  as 
just  have  engaged  our  attention.  It  can  hardly  be 
believed,  in  the  first  place,  that  a  single  disregard  of 
conscience  would  have  been  equivalent  to  its  perma- 
nent overthrow,  and  have  accomplished  its  incapac- 
ity farther  to  dispute  the  field  successfully  against 
all  the  propensities.  Such  a  sweepingly  disastrous 
result  does  not  agree  with  our  observations,  nor  is  it 
conformable  to  the  expectations  we  should  naturally 
form  respecting  a  divinely  implanted  monitor  over 
human  conduct.  Repeated  violations  of  conscience 
will  undoubtedly,  in  time,  blunt  and  deaden  its 
force ;  but  a  single  commission  of  a  single  sin  does 
not,  so  far  as  we  have  reason  to  believe,  permanently 
and  effectively  undermine  its  influence  within  us,  or 
render  it  perceptibly  less  active  or  efficient  in  its  op- 
position to  indulgences  of  a  different  character.  Still 
less  are  future  generations  so  influenced  by  the  acts 
of  their  ancestors,  that  in  consequence  of  a  single  sin 
they  are  born  into  the  world  perceptibly  deficient 
in  moral  faculties.  Such  a  theoiy  would  require  a 
continual  and  progressive  depreciation  in  the  moral 


COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED.       273 

powers  of  the  race,  and  this  we  know  is  far  from 
being  exhibited  in  fact.  And  in  the  second  place, 
could  we  believe  that  any  such  consequence  natu- 
rally ensued  to  the  conscience  or  its  influence,  by 
the  disobedience,  there  would  have  been  no  reason 
why  any  other  sin,  actually  committed  by  Adam, 
should  not  have  produced  a  similar  result.  The 
story,  however,  shows  that  this  could  not  have  been 
the  effect  of  any  other  act,  however  repugnant  to 
the  conscience  ;  and  for  this,  with  the  other  reasons 
we  have  urged,  we  are  driven  to  conclude  that  the 
supposed  "  fall "  of  Adam  and  his  race,  did  not 
consist  in  the  natural  loss  of  moral  strength  or  in- 
fluence. 

We  have  thus  exhausted,  as  we  believe,  all  the 
grounds  upon  which  the  doctrine  of  a  "  deterio- 
ration "  or  fall  in  man  at  the  transgression,  or  his 
loss  of  God's  favor,  or  Holy  Spirit,  at  that  time,  can 
be  rested.  If  no  such  change  for  the  worse  can  be 
made  out,  and  if  it  cannot  be  believed  that  he  could 
fall  under  God's  displeasure  or  disfavor  without 
some  such  adequate  cause,  then  we  seem  compelled 
to  explain  the  undoubted  cessation  of  the  Divine 
intimacy  and  companionship  which  ensued,  by  sup- 
posing it  to  have  been  unattended  by  displeasure  on 
the  part  of  the  Creator.  This  conclusion  coincides 
with  the  view  we  are  urging  in  these  pages.  We 
suppose  that  man,  by  the  transgression  having  ac- 
quired a  conscience,  was  no  longer  in  need  of  God's 
personal  indwelling  or  influence  to.  direct  his  con- 
18 


274  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

duct ;  that  he  was  now  prepared  to  walk  alone  in 
the  path  of  duty,  and  was  accordingly  left  by  his 
Maker  to  put  forth  those  unsupported  movements  in 
the  formation  of  moral  character,  which  were  neces- 
sary for  his  strength  and  discipline  as  a  free  moral 
agent.  Adopting  this  view,  the  difficulties  which 
we  have  noticed  as  embarrassing  the  common  doc- 
trine are  met  no  longer.  Discovering  that  the  evils 
necessarily  incident  to  humanity  are  not  of  the  na- 
ture of  penalties,  and  that  we  are,  therefore,  not 
punished  for  Adam's  disobedience,  we  are  no  longer 
driven  to  believe  that  we  are  in  any  way  held  ac- 
countable for  it,  or  for  the  nature  with  which  the 
Creator  has  endowed  us.  While  insisting  that  we 
are  judged  for  our  own  acts  alone,  in  accordance 
with  the  plain  and  admitted  rules  of  justice,  we  yet 
do  not  ignore  any  of  the  facts  of  experience  or  of 
Scripture,  nor  deny  that  in  consequence  of  Adam's 
transgression  death  was  entailed  upon  all  his  poster- 
ity forever.  All  the  difficulties,  the  inconsistencies, 
and  the  impossibilities  which  we  have  been  discuss- 
ing, take  their  rise  directly  or  indirectly  in  the  doc- 
trine that  Adam's  transgression  was  a  "  sin,"  and 
that  the  burdens  imposed  upon  him  in  consequence 
were  "  penalties "  to  which  his  race  were  "  sen- 
tenced "  therefor.  While  this  ground  is  adhered 
to,  they  are  unavoidable,  and  can  never  be  fully 
disposed  of  without  either  abandoning  this  founda- 
tion, or  the  doctrine  of  God's  benevolence,  as  well 
as  the  first  principles  of  justice  and  reason. 


MANKIND  NOT  A  FAILURE.  275 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  COMMON  VIEW  OF  THE  FALL  EXAMINED  WITH 
REFERENCE  TO  ITS  DOCTRINE  THAT  MANKIND  IS 
A  FAILURE. 

OUR  limits  will  permit  us  to  refer  to  but  one  more 
difficulty  to  which  the  common  view  gives  rise.  It 
is  of  scarcely  inferior  magnitude  to  those  which  we 
have  discussed,  though  of  perhaps  less  practical  mo- 
ment. The  view  represents  to  us  God  creating 
Man  in  a  high  and  responsible  condition  as  a  moral 
being,  —  his  native  character  and  faculties,  his  rank 
in  the  universe,  his  relations  to  his  Maker,  and  his 
prescribed  destiny,  being  far  more  exalted  than  they 
have  at  any  time  since  been  exhibited.  It  tells  us 
that  scarcely  had  he  been  formed  in  this  perfect 
mould,  and  inaugurated  in  this  lofty  place  and  mis- 
sion, —  scarcely  had  his  Maker  pronounced  him 
"  very  good,"  and  begun  to  lead  him  upward  in  his 
destined  path  of  greatness  and  glory, — ere,  by  a  sin- 
gle step,  he  fell  from  his  high  estate,  and  sank  into 
corruption,  wretchedness,  and  ruin.  It  is  not  merely 
that  he  failed  to  become  all  that  his  opportunities 
might  have  made  him.  "  It  is  on  all  hands  ad- 
mitted," says  one  of  our  strongest  modern  theolo- 
gians, "  that  the  fall  of  Adam  involved  the  race  in 
RUIN  !  "  Man,  at  the  very  outset,  broke  down  in  fail- 


276  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

ure  !  For  this,  the  system  of  the  universe  offers  no 
analogy.  All  created  things  are  in  the  divine  wis- 
dom made  of  temporary  continuance.  By  their  very 
constitution,  being  formed  to  fill  a  particular  sphere, 
and  accomplish  a  particular  end,  having  answered 
their  object  they  fall  into  decay  and  disappear.  All 
this  we  see  without  impeachment  of  the  divine 
power  or  foresight,  for  here  is  a  manifest  fulfilment 
of  design,  —  a  purpose,  a  progress,  and  a  consumma- 
tion. Nowhere  among  all  the  kingdoms  of  Nature 
can  an  object  be  found  which  is  stamped  with  the 
mark  of  its  own  failure  and  of  God's  disappointment. 
But  theology  insists  that  one  must  be  excepted.  In 
man,  it  declares, —  in  man  we  behold  a  work  which, 
as  originally  made,  was  the  last,  the  noblest,  and 
the  best  of  God's  creating.  He  was  the  work  upon 
which  God  entered  with  a  special  solemnity,  and 
which,  w-hen  finished,  he  displayed  as  the  master- 
piece of  his  wisdom  and  power ;  a  creature  which 
he  cherished  with  affectionate  and  careful  attention, 
and  which  he  destined  for  a  career  as  splendid  in 
the  illustration  of  his  character  as  its  nature  was 
glorious  by  the  reflection  of  his  image.  And  this 
creature,  so  glorious,  so  perfect,  so  tenderly  guarded 
and  instructed,  before  it  has  fairly  started  on  its 
course,  falls  into  sudden  and  hopeless  RUIN  !  In- 
stead of  remaining  in  and  reflecting  his  holiness, 
it  sinks  at  once  into  corruption  and  sin !  Instead 
of  preserving  its  harmony  and  friendship  with  him- 
self, it  repels  him  from  the  very  beginning  of  temp- 


MANKIND  NOT  A  FAILURE.  277 

tation  with  hostility  and  hatred !  Its  normal  state 
has  scarcely  been  disclosed  ere  it  has  disappeared  ; 
its  purposed  destiny,  even  before  it  is  fully  revealed, 
is  forfeited ;  the  joy  and  love  which  were  to  mark 
its  career  are  changed  to  gall  and  bitterness,  its 
intended  glory  to  shame  and  contempt ! 

We  will  not  assert  that  here  is  implied  a  disap- 
pointment, —  a  thwarting  of  God's  plans  and  ex- 
pectations. We  will  not  deny  that  man  might 
possibly  have  been  created  for  the  very  purpose  of 
having  him  thus  miserably  and  deplorably  fail  of 
his  natural  destiny.  We  will  not  dispute  that  God 
might  be  conceived  to  have  thus  formed  him  noble, 
holy,  and  angelic,  with  the  full  design  that  he 
should  sink  immediately  into  a  state  earthly,  sen- 
sual, and  devilish.  But  what  we  insist  is,  that  if 
here  was  not  a  disappointment  of  God's  original 
plan,  —  if  man's  failure  was  really  accordant  with 
his  first  scheme,  —  then  the  moral  system  pre- 
sents a  stupendous  anomaly  in  the  universe,  —  a 
strange  and  terrible  departure  from  the  otherwise 
invariable  divine  methods  of  progress  and  order. 
In  it  we  see  what  nowhere  else  is  displayed  to  us, 
—  the  Deity  working  by  retrogressions,  retreats, 
and  corrections.  We  behold  Him,  after  creating 
man  to  his  satisfaction,  —  after  pronouncing  him 
"  very  good,"  (i.  <?.,  in  full  accordance  with  the  Di- 
vine purpose  at  the  time  of  his  formation,)  —  im- 
mediately, in  pursuance  of  an  original  intention, 
degrading  and  mutilating  this  perfect  work;  and 


278  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

next,  (again  turning  upon  himself,)  drawing  out 
the  energies  of  Heaven,  and  Earth,  and  Hell,  to 
accomplish  its  partial  restoration. 

Let  it  not  be  urged  that  this  asserted  degradation 
and  mutilation  of  man  was  the  free  act  of  man 
himself,  and  consequently  something  for  which  God 
is  in  no  way  responsible.  Such  an  answer  may 
suffice,  so  far  as  respects  the  divine  irresponsibility 
for  Adam's  personal  act ;  but  not  as  respects  the 
influence  of  that  act  upon  the  race, —  its  relation  to 
their  condition  and  destiny,  —  and  the  incorporation 
by  the  Almighty  of  the  fall  as  a  fundamental  feat- 
ure and  portion  of  his  general  moral  system.  No 
one  hesitates  to  attribute  to  divine  agency  the 
changes  which  occur  in  the  history  of  men  or  of 
nations,  although  these  changes  result  from  the  vol- 
untary acts  of  the  parties  affected  ;  and  in  the  case 
of  this  great  event  in  human  affairs,  the  same  mode 
of  reasoning  is  applicable.  Supposing  this  event  to 
have  been  a  fall  of  the  race  in  Adam,  then  God, 
when  he  created  man,  either  designed  for  the  race 
(not  merely  foresaw,  but  purposed^)  a  moral  system 
involving  its  fall,  degradation,  and  sinfulness  through 
its  progenitor  and  representative ;  or  he  designed 
for  it  a  system  not  involving  this  reverse  and  ruin. 
If  the  former,  then  it  must  follow  that  the  repre- 
sentative degradation  and  sinfulness  of  Adam,  how- 
ever voluntary,  were  in  fulfilment  of  the  divine 
purpose  in  his  creation,  —  that  had  he,  in  the  exer- 
cise of  his  free  agency,  and  in  his  capacity  as  a 


MANKIND  NOT  A  FAILURE.  279 

federal  head,  overcome  temptation  and  remained  free 
from  sin,  this  original  divine  purpose  would  have 
been  frustrated  :  that  in  that  case  the  moral  system 
as  first  planned  must  have  been  abandoned ;  or  else, 
to  carry  it  out,  Adam  must  have  been  exposed  to 
such  other  successive  trials  as  would  at  last  have 
resulted  in  his  freely  sinning,  and  with  the  design 
that  they  should  so  result,  or  have  been  removed, 
and  the  experiment  renewed  with  another  and  less 
resolute  federal  head. 

It  will  probably  be  difficult  to  assent  to  the  idea 
that  God  could  desire  and  deliberately  plan  for  the 
guilt,  ruin,  and  wretchedness  of  the  race.  And  if, 
to  avoid  such  conclusions,  we  assume  the  other  of 
the  two  suppositions  suggested,  and  assert  that  in 
creating  man  his  Maker  designed  for  him  a  moral 
system  that  did  not  involve  this  representative  fall 
and  corruption  in  Adam,  then  it  must  follow  that 
he  has  been  disappointed  and  thwarted  by  the 
actual  result,  and  has  been  drawn  into  a  system 
different  from  that  which  he  originally  contem- 
plated. Apart  from  other  objections  to  such  a  con- 
clusion, however,  we  cannot  admit  the  possibility 
that  Adam's  individual  act  (even  if  unforeseen) 
could  change  or  thwart  the  divine  purpose  with 
regard  to  the  race  in  general.  If  we  can  admit  that 
his  Maker  might  have  made  him  the  federal  head 
of  the  race  without  knowing  into  what  position,  as 
such  head,  he  would  bring  it,  still  it  will  be  hard  to 
admit  that  God  could  not  remedy  the  evil,  when 


280  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

Adam  had  acted  in  his  federal  capacity  in  a  manner 
different  from  that  expected  and  designed.  As  a 
free  agent,  Adam  might  doubtless  defeat  God's 
plans  for  him  as  an  individual ;  but  the  great  pre- 
destined course  and  sphere  of  the  human  race,  that 
for  which  it  was  in  the  far  counsels  of  eternity  pro- 
jected, and  for  the  accomplishment  of  which  it  was 
now  created,  could  not  be  thus  easily  disturbed.  If 
Adam  failed  to  inaugurate  its  career  in  the  manner 
designed,  (and  this  as  a  free  agent  he  might  do,) 
nothing  would  be  easier  than  to  form  another  fede- 
ral head  for  humanity.  And  it  is  inconceivable  but 
that  in  this  or  in  some  other  way,  the  Almighty 
would  have  secured  the  initiation  and  advancement 
of  the  race  in  the  particular  course  he  had  marked 
out  for  it. 

It  will  be  perceived  that  we  herein  distinctly 
take  the  ground  that  the  actual  moral  system  must 
have  been  the  one  originally  purposed,  and,  hence, 
that  the  actual  moral  condition  and  experiences  of 
the  race  must  be  those  which  were  at  the  outset 
designed  for  it  as  a  race.  Under  any  view  which 
gives  a  moral  character  to  the  representative  act  of 
Adam,  and  so  makes  that  act  prejudice  the  moral 
position,  character,  or  relations  of  the  race,  it  seems 
impossible  to  hold  such  a  doctrine  without  supposing 
a  divine  agency  or  connivance  in  the  inroad  of  sin  ; 
but  under  the  view  we  are  advocating  no  such 
consequences  follow,  and  we  believe  that  the  propo- 
sition just  enunciated  must,  at  all  events,  irresistibly 
result  from  any  correct  system  of  reasoning. 


MANKIND  NOT  A  FAILURE.  281 

"  But,"  it  may  be  inquired,  "  does  the  fact  that 
man  is  corrupt  and  miserable,  prove  that  God  de- 
signed he  should  be  so  ?  Is  God,  then,  pleased 
with  man  for  so  fulfilling  his  designs  by  wickedness 
and  misery  ?  If  so,  how  can  sin  be  said  to  be  dis- 
pleasing to  the  Creator  ?  Where  is  its  heinousness, 
and  where  man's  accountability  for  it  ?  "  Certainly 
we  cannot  believe  that  God  is  in  any  way  respon- 
sible as  the  author  or  introducer  of  sin,  or  that  he 
views  it  with  any  other  feeling  than  abhorrence. 
We  cannot  believe  that  sin  is  the  legitimate  and 
proper  destiny  of  man,  that  he  ought  not  to  resist 
it  with  all  his  power,  and  that  he  would  not  better 
please  his  Maker  by  so  doing  than  by  yielding  as 
he  does  to  its  sway.  How,  then,  are  these  different 
positions  to  be  reconciled  ? 

We  believe  that  no  difficulty  will  be  met  in  such 
reconciliation,  if  the  distinction  is  recognized  be- 
tween "  the  race  "  as  an  entity,  an  undivided  unit 
in  its  whole  history  and  existence,  and  "  the  race  " 
as  separated  into  the  different  individuals  compos- 
ing it.  Now  it  is  manifest  that,  as  regards  these 
numberless  separate  individuals,  inasmuch  as  they 
are  all  free  agents,  God  cannot  determine  by  his 
own  will  what  their  various  characters  shall  be. 
He  may,  and  doubtless  does  create  each  one  of 
them,  desiring  his  personal  holiness,  and  giving  him 
the  requisite  capabilities  for  achieving  it ;  thus  de- 
signing holiness  to  be  the  individual  state  of  each 
and  every  man,  and  happiness  and  glory  his  indi- 


282  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

vidual  destiny.  This  being  so,  if,  notwithstanding 
this  purpose  and  desire  of  the  Creator,  they  do, 
each  and  all  of  them  in  the  exercise  of  their  sepa- 
rate powers  as  free  agents,  become  wicked  and 
miserable,  the  act  is  their  own,  and  God  is  free 
from  all  responsibih'ty,  even  though  he  may  from 
the  beginning  have  foreseen  the  result.  Now  this 
has  been  actually  the  case  with  the  whole  race, 
viewed  as  individuals  ;  and  thus  we  say  that,  in 
this  sense,  man  alone  is  the  author  of  sin,  is  respon- 
sible for  it,  and  in  committing  it  displeases  God,  and 
forsakes  his  legitimate  and  intended  destiny. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  clear  that  the  race  as 
such,  as  it  has  no  personality,  cannot  have  the  power 
of  deciding  its  own  character,  and  therefore  cannot, 
as  a  race,  have  any  moral  accountability.  The 
same  distinction  may  be  made  with  regard  to  in- 
dividual and  national  character.  Any  individual 
man  may  and  must  control  liis  own  separate  char- 
acter and  destiny ;  but  no  man  can  determine  the 
character  and  destiny  of  his  race  or  nation  as  such, — 
that  character  being  the  aggregate  of  all  the  separate 
characters  of  all  the  different  persons  composing  the 
race  or  nation  in  all  places  and  ages.  Now  we  may 
evidently  agree  that  certain  general  causes  or  in- 
fluences, permitted  by  the  Almighty  to  exist  in  his 
moral  system  for  man,  may  continuously  operate 
through  the  innumerable  ages  of  human  history, 
which,  without  impairing  the  free  agency  of  any 
individual,  may  render  probable  or  certain  a  certain 


MANKIND  NOT  A  FAILURE.  283 

general  character  in  the  whole  race  taken  together. 
Thus  a  government  may  be  so  administered  for 
generations,  that,  without  forcing  any  man  to  the 
commission  of  base  or  fraudulent  acts,  the  charac- 
ter of  the  nation  shall  inevitably  become  corrupt 
and  deceitful.  In  the  case  of  a  human  govern- 
ment, indeed,  such  a  course  and  result  imply  wrong 
and  injustice  on  its  part,  for  the  reason  that  human 
governments  are  but  the  creatures  of  the  governed, 
and  under  solemn  obligation  to  them  to  use  their 
powers  in  a  particular  manner ;  but  in  the  divine 
system  no  such  inference  can  be  drawn,  because  no 
obligation  exists  to  establish  any  particular  system 
for  the  masses,  provided  no  injustice  or  hardship  is 
done  to  any  individual.  We  would  reverse  a  com- 
mon theological  dogma,  —  that  God  has  a  right  to 
pursue  any  course  with  the  individual  that  tends  to 
advance  the  general  good  of  the  whole.  On  the 
contrary,  we  insist  that  the  divine  obligation  is  to 
the  individual  alone,  for  he  is  alone  held  account- 
able. The  Almighty  may  not  do  him  injustice  or 
wrong,  nor  adopt  any  general  system  that  involves 
such  special  injuries.  But  this  principle  observed, 
God  has  a  right  to  select  any  moral  system  for  the 
race  which  will  best  answer  his  wishes  and  designs ; 
and  it  must  follow,  as  a  matter  of  course,  that  if  no 
injustice  or  hardship  is  done  as  against  any  single 
creature,  none  can  be  charged  as  against  the  aggre- 
gate of  the  race.  If,  then,  no  one  person  is  unduly 
influenced  to  evil,  and  yet  the  whole  race  has  be- 


284  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

come  evil,  —  if,  in  other  words,  the  Almighty  has 
selected  for  this  world  a  moral  system  involving 
an  aggregate  sinful  character  of  mankind,  though 
through  the  voluntary  sinfulness  of  each  individual, 
—  then  He  may  be  properly  said  to  have  contem- 
plated for  the  race  as  such  the  character  thus  re- 
sulting, so  to  continue  until  in  the  progress  of  his 
plan  it  shall  be  changed  to  one  that  is  higher  and 
better.  And  in  all  this,  as  we  have  already  seen, 
no  injustice  is  necessarily  implied ;  —  we  can  only 
say  that  so,  for  his  wise  purposes,  God  willed  it 
should  be. 

To  enunciate  the  principle  in  general  terms  we 
may  express  it  as  follows :  Every  created  thing  has 
its  prescribed  place  and  purposed  destiny  in  God's 
scheme  of  the  universe.  Of  free  agents,  since  these 
hold  necessarily  the  decision  of  their  own  character 
and  destiny,  that  character  and  destiny  can  only  be 
foreseen,  not  determined,  by  the  Creator.  Of  all 
things  not  free  agents,  the  character  and  destiny 
must  be  predetermined  by  Him.  Hence,  the  race 
as  such,  not  being  in  its  collective  capacity  a  free 
agent,  whatever  character  and  destiny  it  may  have 
in  that  capacity,  must  be  that  which  it  was  designed 
to  have. 

To  apply  these  conclusions  to  the  subject  under 
consideration  will  be  easy  and  simple.  The  com- 
mon view,  as  we  have  seen,  attempts  to  explain 
the  existence  of  evil,  and  the  wretched  condition  of 
the  race,  by  saying  that  they  are  both  in  opposition 


MANKIND  NOT  A  FAILURE.  285 

to  the  divine  intentions,  —  that  the  race,  as  a  race, 
has  gone  astray,  has  missed  its  destiny,  is  lost  and 
ruined.  It  argues  that  our  confidence  in  God's  be- 
nevolence and  justice  compels  us  to  believe  that 
God  must  have  created  the  race  for  a  holy  and 
happy  career  and  destiny  ;  that  a  different  state  of 
things  having  ensued,  the  race  as  such  must  have 
disappointed  those  purposes  and  missed  that  destiny. 
Casting  about,  then,  to  find  when  and  how  that  com- 
mon forfeiture  occurred,  it  fixes  on  Adam's  trans- 
gression as  the  occasion,  and  concludes  that  this 
transgression  must  have  been  a  fatal  and  federal 
sin,  of  which  corruption,  ruin,  and  death,  in  Adam 
and  the  race,  have  been  the  fearful  penalty.  Of  all 
this,  the  views  just  presented,  if  correct,  completely 
dispose.  For  it  is  apparent  that  benevolence  and 
justice  do  not  require  that  God  should  prescribe 
a  holy  and  happy  career  for  the  race  as  such,  so 
long  as  he  does  place  such  career  within  the  reach 
of  the  individuals  that  compose  it,  or  offer  to  these 
individuals  such  other  destiny  as  is  consistent  with 
justice.  As  no  man  is  punished  for  the  character 
of  the  race  apart  from  his  own,  or  is  prevented  by 
the  prescribed  destiny  of  the  race  as  such  from 
achieving  perfection  as  his  own,  —  in  other  words, 
as  no  harm  or  injustice  is  done  by  designing  for  the 
race  as  such  that  which  has  been  its  actual  career 
and  condition,  —  of  course,  the  principles  of  neither 
benevolence  nor  justice  are  impugned  by  supposing 
such  design  to  have  existed.  Accordingly,  it  be- 


286  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

comes  no  longer  necessary  to  relieve  God  from  the 
responsibility  of  having  designed  for  the  race  as 
such  that  which  is  its  actual  condition,  or  to  suppose 
a  fall  and  forfeiture  by  it,  in  order  to  account  for 
that  general  condition.  Regarding,  then,  the  origi- 
nal transgression  of  Adam  as  neither  a  fall  nor  a  sin^ 
nor  necessarily  productive  of  either,  there  can  be 
no  repugnance  to  believing  it  to  have  been  accord- 
ant with  God's  wishes  and  designs,  and  entirely 
consistent  with  his  benevolence  and  justice,  both 
as  regards  its  effects  upon  Adam  and  upon  the  suc- 
ceeding race. 

But  while  it  is  thus  insisted  that  the  race  as 
such  has  not  missed  its  destiny  and  is  not,  there- 
fore, with  reference  to  its  original  condition,  in  a 
lost  and  ruined  state,  no  such  claim  can  be  made 
for  the  different  human  creatures  that  compose  it. 
That  each  one  of  these  has  missed  the  path  of  his 
true  destiny,  and  is  in  a  lost  and  ruined  state 
through  his  own  sinfulness,  until  redeemed  and 
saved,  is  painfully  indisputable.  Through  the  en- 
ergy of  the  appetites,  the  habit  of  submission  to 
their  force  is  formed  even  before  the  awakening  of 
conscience ;  and  men  thus  almost  invariably  become 
sinners  upon  their  first  temptation  after  becoming 
moral  agents.  When  we  say,  however,  that  they 
are  lost  and  ruined,  we  use  the  expression  rather 
with  reference  to  what  they  might  and  ought  to  be, 
than  to  what  they  ever  have  been ;  for,  becoming 
sinners  even  upon  their  first  entrance  into  moral 


MANKIND  NOT  A  FAILURE.  287 

life,  their  spiritual  advancement  is  one  of  progress 
rather  than  restoration.  Herein  we  detect  the  anal- 
ogy between  the  moral  career  of  the  individual  and 
that  of  the  race.  Properly  understood,  we  believe 
the  same  general  method  will  be  found  to  appear  in 
both,  and  that  a  parallel  may  be  closely  followed 
between  them.  In  the  few  following  pages  of  this 
work  we  shall  attempt,  in  however  brief  and  im- 
perfect a  manner,  to  trace  the  main  features  of  that 
parallel.  We  shall  endeavor  to  show  that  in  his 
moral  plan  with  men,  both  individually  and  collec- 
tively, God's  course  has  been,  as  in  all  other  works 
of  which  we  are  cognizant,  that  of  a  steady  and  con- 
stant progress,  beginning  with  immaturity  and  pro- 
ceeding toward  perfection.  Upon  no  other  theory 
can  the  difficulties  we  have  been  discussing,  and 
others,  be  avoided.  "  The  conflict  of  ages "  re- 
specting the  moral  government  of  God,  originating 
in,  and  waged  over,  the  doctrines  of  man's  primal 
fall,  and  a  system  of  restoration  to  God's  favor,  —  a 
conflict  still  as  far  from  being  settled  as  ever,  — 
warns  us  to  abandon  the  foundation  which  has 
proved  so  unsatisfactory.  Perhaps  no  other  will 
ever  be  offered  that  shall  be  free  from  objection ; 
yet  in  hopes  that  we  may  awaken  in  others  a  spirit 
of  reflection  on  the  subject,  we  venture  to  close 
this  work  with  a  rough  outline  of  God's  progres- 
sive moral  system,  such  as  revelation,  reason,  and 
experience  seem  to  reveal  it. 


288  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 


CHAPTEE  V. 

OUTLINES  OF  THE  PKOGRESSIVE   MORAL  SYSTEM. 

IN  turning  to  contemplate  the  moral  history  of 
the  race,  we  naturally  revert  first  to  the  circum- 
stances of  its  origin.  We  go  back  to  the  time  when 
the  Almighty,  having  brought  his  material  creation 
by  successive  and  advancing  stages  of  preparation 
toward  the  crowning  work  of  MAN,  is  now  ready  to 
usher  him  into  being.  Being  thus  on  the  threshold 
of  his  moral  scheme,  we  may  suppose  the  Deity 
planning  in  advance  the  method  by  which  he  will 
raise  this  moral  system  upon  the  foundations  so 
slowly  and  elaborately  reared  for  it.  When  we  re- 
member the  uniform  mode  of  action  exhibited  in  all 
his  previous  works,  there  seems  but  one  supposi- 
tion to  be  made  of  the  course  he  will  adopt.  We 
almost  of  necessity  suppose  him,  conformably  with 
his  invariable  plan  of  orderly  progress,  marking  out 
for  his  moral  scheme  successive  stages  of  advance- 
ment, from  its  commencement  to  its  consummation. 
He  will  not,  as  he  never  has,  begin  with  complete- 
ness, and  make  his  system  a  mere  succession  of  in- 
juries and  repairs,  of  ruins  and  partial  recoveries, 
but  every  step  shall  be  an  advance  upon  the  preced- 
ing ; — all  together  exhibiting  an  orderly  and  progres- 


THE  MORAL  SYSTEM  PROGRESSIVE.     289 

sive  plan,  proceeding  onward  and  upward,  from  the 
first  awakening  germs  of  moral  nature  and  govern- 
ment, toward  their  highest  manifestation  in  the  per- 
fect holiness  and  freedom  of  their  Infinite  Author. 
Such  being  supposed  to  be  the  general  design,  how 
does  Revelation  exhibit  the  process  of  its  accom- 
plishment ? 

First,  He  creates  the  being  in  whose  career  this 
moral  system  is  to  be  exhibited.  He  forms  this 
being  on  a  scale,  both  physically  and  intellectually, 
worthy  of  his  high  mission,  and  endows  him  with 
all  mental  attributes,  which  will  be  useful  when  he 
shall  come  into  possession  of  his  moral  faculty.  So 
far,  in  all  these  noble  qualities,  is  he  made  in  advance 
of  all  other  creatures,  —  so  much  more  closely  in 
resemblance  to  the  attributes  of  God  himself,  that 
he  is  said  to  be  in  the  divine  image  and  likeness. 
Yet  his  first  necessities,  both  of  body  and  mind, 
pertain  to  his  physical  nature  and  to  his  material 
circumstances.  Until  the  rudiments  of  his  educa- 
tion in  relation  to  these  matters  shall  be  gained,  any 
moral  faculties  or  training  would  be  premature  and 
superfluous.  Accordingly,  the  first  hours  of  the 
first  man's  life,  as  of  every  one  of  his  descendants, 
are  spent  in  learning  to  preserve  his  own  physical 
existence,  and  to  secure  physical  comforts  and  con- 
venience ; — in  other  words,  to  acquire  habits,  powers, 
and  principles  requisite  for  supremacy  over  material 
nature.  These  essential  experiences  being  gained, 
and  he  fairly  installed  in  life,  all  is  now  ready  for 
19 


290  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

his  introduction  to  the  moral  career  for  which  he 
was  created. 

Nor  is  it  merely  proper  and  fitting  that  the  moral 
life  should  begin  in  man  at  this  period  of  his  exist- 
ence, but  it  is  also  just  here  that  his  nature  requires 
its  appearance  as  a  restraint  upon  the  propensities 
within  him,  whose  energies  his  growing  wants  and 
coming  circumstances  are  about  to  develop.  Be- 
fore increasing  intelligence  should  awaken  new  and 
perilous  cravings,  before  society  should  grow  up 
around  him,  with  its  excitements  and  temptations, 
and  especially  before  posterity  —  who,  by  the  Di- 
vine plan,  were  to  be  born  with  moral  faculties  — 
should  be  generated,  it  was  necessary  that  the  pro- 
genitor of  the  race  should  become  a  moral  being. 
Just  at  this  time,  therefore,  in  a  way  the  circum- 
stances of  which,  and  the  reasons  for  which,  have 
been  set  forth  in  previous  pages,  the  first  man,  then 
in  himself  comprising  the  race  of  whose  future  myr- 
iads he  was  to  become  the  father,  enters  upon  his 
moral  career  by  awaking  to  the  perception  of  moral 
truths,  just  as  all  his  descendants  first  became  con- 
scious of  moral  distinctions  at  a  corresponding  stage 
of  their  being.  This  original  state  of  man,  then, 
may,  in  reference  to  his  moral  history,  be  properly 
designated  the  infancy  of  the  race. 

The  nature  of  the  change  that  thus  occurred  in 
humanity  when  moral  consciousness  first  dawned, 
was  not,  any  more  than  it  is  in  individual  expe- 
rience, an  alteration  of  its  character  or  propensities, 


THE  MORAL  SYSTEM  PROGRESSIVE.  291 

so  as  to  make  it  intrinsically  different  from  before. 
The  moral  scheme,  if  it  designed  to  leave  man  a 
free  agent,  could  do  no  more  than  give  him  the 
ability  and  opportunity  to  shape  and  determine  his 
own  character,  and  the  first  step  toward  this  was,  of 
course,  to  make  him  a  creature  capable  of  having 
one.  Up  to  this  period  he  had  been  under  the  im- 
mediate supervision  and  tutelage  of  his  Divine  Sov- 
ereign, and  so  had  had  neither  occasion  nor  oppor- 
tunity to  develop  and  discipline  his  moral  powers, 
had  he  been  in  possession  of  such.  Now,  having 
received  them,  —  having  the  inward  voice  of  con- 
science to  guide  and  warn  him, — he  may  and  will  be 
thrown  more  upon  these  inner  resources  and  aids  of 
moral  development.  Man  will  be  no  longer  carried 
as  a  moral  infant  in  the  divine  arms ;  he  will  be 
left,  in  some  degree  at  least,  to  bear  his  own  weight, 
to  walk  by  himself,  no  matter  how  awkwardly  and 
imperfectly,  until  he  shall  have  learned  the  use  and 
value  of  his  inner  faculties.  We  shall  find  the 
Creator,  then,  not  entirely  withdrawing  from  his 
supervision  of  the  race,  yet  communicating  with  it 
only  in  such  occasional  manner  as  exigencies  may 
demand, —  such  as  shall  aid  the  growth  and  direction 
of  the  moral  powers  in  a  right  direction,  and  keep 
alive  among  men  the  recognition  of  his  existence 
and  his  relations  to  them  as  their  governor.  These 
revelations  will  not  relate  to  general  principles  of 
morality,  but  only  to  the  law  of  particular  cases  ;  — 
the  child  is,  as  yet,  to  be  only  supported  when  he 


292  THE  RISE  AXD  THE  FALL. 

totters,  not  instructed  in  the  science  of  walking  with 
precision  and  grace.  The  first  phase  of  the  moral 
system,  then,  is  the  regime  or  DISPENSATION  OF  CON- 
SCIENCE, the  only  rule  of  conduct  of  which  the 
Patriarchs  and  their  contemporaries  seem  to  have 
had  any  knowledge,  excepting,  as  we  have  before 
seen,  such  rules  and  regulations  as  were  received 
through  special  communications  of  the  Almighty. 

In  those  early  days  before  History,  Philosophy, 
and  Revelation  had  done  anything  toward  exhibit- 
ing and  settling  the  principles  of  right  and  justice, 
so  imperfect  a  guide  in  morals  as  conscience  alone, 
must  necessarily  have  been  inadequate  to  human 
necessities.  Happily,  however,  men  were  scat- 
tered ;  —  there  were  few  if  any  social  organizations 
more  complex  than  tjiat  of  the  family  under  the 
absolute  government  of  its  patriarchal  head.  The 
wants  of  mankind  were,  therefore,  few  and  easily 
supplied,  their  habits  simple  and  hardy,  their  oppor- 
tunities and  incitements  to  evil  comparatively  incon- 
siderable ;  and  from  these  causes,  as  well  as  from  the 
occasional  divine  interposition  for  direction,  control, 
or  rebuke,  the  terrible  consequences  that  might  be 
expected,  were,  if  not  wholly  prevented,  at  least 
delayed.  Human  passion,  nevertheless,  asserted  its 
ascendancy.  "  The  whole  earth  became  corrupt 
and  filled  with  violence  ; "  and  the  Deluge,  sweeping 
a  generation  from  existence,  came  in  the  history  of 
the  race  like  one  of  those  long-remembered  expe- 
riences or  punishments  of  childhood,  —  a  crisis  hi 


THE  MORAL  SYSTEM  PEOGRESSIVE.  293 

the  individual  life  which  leaves  a  lasting  impression 
upon  the  mind  and  character.  Looking  back  upon 
these  early  and  sad  experiences,  —  these  enormities 
and  these  retributions,  —  we  can  see  that  they  were 
producing  a  purposed  effect.  They  were  exhibiting 
to  the  race,  and  forcing  upon  its  recognition,  the 
necessity  for  a  system  of  divine  and  human  law, 
comprehensive,  clear,  and  immutable,  for  the  gov- 
ernment of  men,  and  also  developing  the  princi- 
ples upon  which  such  law  should  rest.  To  Noah 
after  the  flood,  certain  simple  and  primitive  rules  and 
teachings  preparatory  to  such  a  system,  and  embrac- 
ing some  of  its  essential  particulars,  were  imparted, 
—  such,  indeed,  and  such  only  as  the  then  moral  de- 
velopment of  the  race  had  fitted  it  to  receive.  Now 
we  begin  to  see  human  governments  established  for 
the  first  time,  —  a  fact  which  of  itself  implies  some 
comprehension  of  legal  and  constitutional  methods, 
barbarous  and  imperfect  enough  no  doubt.  At  a 
later  period,  after  ages  of  experience,  when  civil 
society  was  better  settled  and  organized,  and  relig- 
ious forms  and  doctrines  more  fully  reduced  to  sys- 
tem, there  had  come  to  obtain  more  general  and 
philosophical  conceptions  of  abstract  morality,  espe- 
cially among  the  chosen  people  which  God  was 
training  to  be  the  vehicle  of  his  revelations  and 
laws  to  man.  Yet  no  one  can  carefully  read  the 
history  of  the  race  down  to  the  exodus  from  Egypt 
without  observing  how  crude  and  imperfect  were 
men's  moral  notions,  the  remarkable  abstinence  by 


294  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

the  Almighty  from  enunciations  of  general  laws  and 
principles,  (even  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  enjoined  or  practised 
till  the  time  of  Moses,)  and  how  low  a  standard  of 
morality  God  was  content  to  accept  and  even  to 
require.  He  seems  to  treat  mankind  as  immature 
and  ignorant  children  ;  and  when  he  imparts  instruc- 
tion it  relates  only  to  particular  cases,  as  if  a  knowl- 
edge of  abstract  moral  principles  were,  as  yet,  not 
to  be  expected  of  men. 

This  early  experimental  training  of  the  race,  in 
learning  the  necessity  and  the  principles  of  moral 
and  social  law,  corresponds  with  the  process  which 
every  human  creature  goes  through  immediately 
after  his  infancy  is  passed,  and  he  has  entered  on 
the  comprehension  of  moral  distinctions.  His  mind, 
as  yet  immature  and  incapable  at  once  of  digesting 
abstract  truths,  gradually  deduces  them  from  the 
experiences  of  life,  assisted  by  the  instructions,  the 
reproofs,  and  the  chastisements  of  parents  or  guar- 
dians. Thus  he  learns  moral  laws,  not  at  first  in 
the  form  of  a  system,  but  by  seeing  them  disclosed 
in  particular  cases,  and  so  is  gradually  prepared  to 
receive  them  reduced  to  a  code,  and  to  recognize  the 
justice,  the  authority,  and  the  necessity  of  such 
code  when  presented.  As  the  period,  then,  when 
mankind  was  insensible  to  moral  distinctions  was 
denominated  its  infancy,  so  the  period  just  consid- 
ered as  immediately  following,  may  be  called  the 
childhood  of  the  race  in  respect  to  its  stage  and 
process  of  moral  development. 


THE  MORAL  SYSTEM  PROGRESSIVE.  295 

Having  thus  passed  through  the  requisite  prelim- 
inary training,  by  the  time  of  Moses,  as  we  have 
seen,  the  world  was  prepared  for  the  next  great 
step  in  its  moral  history,  —  the  revelation  of  a 
MORAL  LAW,  exhibiting  with  divine  authority  and 
completeness  the  whole  code  of  human  obligation. 
This  was  the  law  given  to  Moses.  The  Ten  Com- 
mandments, which  were  its  basis,  constituted  a  brief 
and  comprehensive  epitome  of  moral  duty  of  uni- 
versal and  unchanging  obligation ;  while  the  attend- 
ant statutes,  ordinances,  and  revelations,  although  a 
great  portion  of  them  applied  especially  to  the  Jews, 
were  yet  of  inestimable  value  to  the  race,  not  merely 
from  their  typical  significance,  but  as  containing  a 
system  of  true  religion,  and  as  illustrating  the  moral 
law  in  its  application  to  the  affairs  of  individual  and 
social  life.  It  will  be  remarked,  however,  that  the 
law  thus  given  sought  chiefly  to  regulate  or  sup- 
press man's  evil  propensities  by  prohibitions  and 
commands,  rather  than  to  do  so  by  imbuing  the 
heart  with  spiritual  affections  whose  superior  strength 
should  supplant  and  prevent  those  tendencies  to  evil. 
Its  spirit  and  effect,  indeed,  were  it  fully  obeyed, 
could  not  fail  to  promote  the  inner  and  spiritual  life 
of  the  soul.  It  even  inculcated,  here  and  there, 
such  sublime  precepts  as  indicated  the  future  and 
higher  stage  of  moral  growth  for  which  it  prepared 
the  race  ;  but  its  main  idea  was  discipline,  obedience, 
a  pure  morality  in  mind  and  conduct,  as  the  essen- 
tial and  sufficient  ground,  at  that  stage  of  man's 
moral  growth,  of  his  acceptance  with  God. 


296  THE  KISE  AND   THE  FALL. 

This  revelation  was  committed  to  a  people  whose 
character  and  designed  history  were  specially  adapted 
for  the  diffusion  and  preservation  of  it  among  men. 
The  effect  which  it  was  purposed  to  produce,  and 
did  produce,  upon  the  moral  growth  of  the  Jews, 
may  be  seen  by  comparing  their  moral  condition 
and  tendencies  when  they  first  received  it,  with 
what  they  had  become  at  the  opening  of  the  Chris- 
tian era.  At  the  first  period,  their  whole  idea  of 
religion  was  associated  with  childish  materialism 
and  superstition,  with  manufactured  divinities  and 
sensual  ceremonials.  At  the  latter,  they  had  long 
outgrown  these  degradations,  and  the  adoration  of 
the  one  invisible  and  eternal  God,  with  the  recog- 
nition of  His  law,  and  reverence  of  its  authority, 
were  fully  and  finally  established.  Viewed,  then, 
as  a  means  of  moral  development,  this  was  the 
great  object  and  result  of  the  Mosaic  revelation : 
to  show  clearly  to  man  his  relations  and  responsi- 
bilities to  his  Maker  as  a  subject  of  His  moral  gov- 
ernment, to  disclose  the  main  features  of  a  true 
religion,  and  to  exhibit  the  whole  outward  duty  of 
every  human  creature,  both  to  his  Maker  and  his 
fellow  man. 

This  phase  or  epoch  of  moral  growth  in  the  race 
corresponds  to  the  experience  which  every  individ- 
ual soul  goes  through  when  it  outgrows  a  reliance 
upon  conscience  and  special  instructions  for  the  direc- 
tion of  its  conduct,  and  begins  to  comprehend  for 
itself  the  revelation  of  God's  law,  measuring  its 


THE  MORAL  SYSTEM  PROGRESSIVE.  297 

obligations  by  the  system  of  duty  therein  disclosed. 
It  is  common  experience  that  the  moral  part  of 
man,  when  awakened  by  conscience  to  the  sense  of 
duty,  first  sets  itself  with  energy  to  the  study  and 
observance  of  the  law, —  seeking  for  satisfaction  and 
growth  in  the  strict  attention  to  the  external  forms 
of  religion  and  practices  of  morality.  Commonly 
and  naturally,  though  not,  of  course,  universally, 
this  process  occurs  when  the  mind,  emerging  from 
the  fickleness,  weakness,  and  dependence  of  child- 
hood, begins  to  feel  the  first  serious  promptings  of 
religious  thought,  and  the  growing  powers  which 
have  not  yet  become  fully  tempered  and  disciplined 
by  maturity  and  experience.  It  then  by  a  natural 
tendency  turns  to  general  truths ;  and,  strong  in  its 
self-confidence,  even  selects  the  principles,  pure  and 
true,  which  it  thinks  shall  direct  its  future  course, 
fully  assured  of  its  own  ability  to  follow  them  un- 
swervingly. This  moral  epoch  and  experience, 
then,  whether  of  the  race  or  of  the  individual,  — 
the  intervening  stage  between  the  commencement 
and  the  maturity  of  moral  life,  —  may  fitly  be  called 
the  youth  of  man's  moral  development. 

It  would  be  impossible  within  our  prescribed  lim- 
its, perhaps  impossible  for  human  intelligence  within 
any  limits,  to  exhibit  in  full  detail  the  economy  of 
the  Mosaic  dispensation  in  the  work  of  man's  moral 
development.  Even  those  particular  features  im- 
mediately illustrating  our  argument  cannot  be  all 
referred  to,  and  we  must  simply  notice  the  most 


298  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

prominent.  That  dispensation,  then,  found  the  race 
in  a  state  of  moral  ignorance,  illumined  only  by 
conscience  and  vague  traditions.  It  revealed  to  it 
with  particularity  the  existence  and  character  of 
God,  the  Creator  and  Ruler  of  the  universe,  his 
purpose  in  man's  creation,  the  relations  and  obliga- 
tions toward  him  of  the  individual  and  mankind. 
It  definitely  disclosed  the  principles  and  precepts  of 
the  moral  code,  the  sublimity  and  glory  of  holiness, 
the  heinousness,  deformity,  and  destructiveness  of 
sin.  It  showed  the  real  moral  position  and  charac- 
ter of  men  in  their  actual  life,  —  that  they  were  a 
race  of  sinners,  prone  to  wickedness,  constantly  in- 
curring God's  displeasure,  exposed  to  the  punish- 
ment of  his  law  ;  —  thus  revealing  in  the  clearest 
manner  their  lost  condition  and  their  need  of  the 
divine  assistance  and  mercy.  Ages  of  experience 
under  it  proved  conclusively,  what  itself  recognized 
in  all  its  parts,  that  from  this  lost  condition  the  law 
itself,  as  a  system  of  commands  requiring  perfect 
obedience,  was  inadequate  to  save  them ;  that  hu- 
man nature,  however  well  instructed  in  duty,  was 
too  weak  against  imperious  appetite  to  render  com- 
plete submission  to  pure  morality  ;  that  neither  the 
race  as  such,  nor  the  individual  man,  could  be 
brought  up  from  a  sinful  state  to  holiness,  —  could 
be  redeemed,  sanctified,  and  perfected,  —  except  by 
means  which  the  same  Mosaic  revelation  divinely 
foreshadowed,  —  the  scheme  of  redemption  and 
atonement  typified  in  the  Jewish  system  of  sacrifices 


THE  MORAL  SYSTEM  PROGRESSIVE.  299 

and  ordinances.  Thus  "  the  law  was  a  school-mas- 
ter "  to  bring  the  race  to  the  Christian  dispensation, 
exhibiting  to  men  at  once  their  need  of  a  Saviour, 
with  the  character  of  his  mission  and  sacrifice,  and 
training  them  in  the  moral  knowledge  and  disci- 
pline requisite  to  appreciate  and  embrace  his  scheme 
of  salvation. 

"  In  the  fulness  of  time,"  therefore,  was  inaugu- 
rated the  third  great  stage  in  man's  moral  advance- 
ment, by  the  advent  of  the  promised  Messiah  and 
the  publication  of  his  Gospel.  We  need  not  here 
consider  at  length  the  nature  and  effect  of  the 
Christian  religion  as  distinguished  from  that  which 
preceded  and  prepared  for  it.  Yet  it  must  be  ob- 
vious to  the  most  superficial  observer  that  Christi- 
anity was  the  complement  of  Judaism.  It  followed 
up  the  work  of  moral  discipline  with  that  of  atone- 
ment, justification  and  sanctification.  It  accepted 
what  had  been  already  accomplished  by  the  aid  of 
the  conscience  and  the  law,  and  pursued  the  labor 
still  farther  into  the  innermost  chambers  of  the 
heart.  The  inadequate  system  of  law  was  not 
supplanted,  but  perfected,  by  the  new  dispensation. 
Man  was  not  discharged  from  his  obligation  to  a 
pure  morality.  On  the  contrary,  a  higher  standard 
was  revealed,  and  a  more  perfect  code  of  duty  both 
toward  God  and  man,  enjoined  for  his  observance. 
Entire  obedience  to  the  law  had  been  found  impos- 
sible for  human  weakness,  and  the  effort  after  it 
wearisome  and  painful.  Yet  Christianity  proclaimed 


300         THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

this  higher  plane  of  duty  which  it  instituted,  as  a 
freedom  instead  of  a  servitude,  and  was  able  so  to 
inspire  and  illumine  the  soul  with  its  spirit,  as  to 
make  it  accept,  realize,  and  rejoice  in  the  doctrine. 
It  entered  into  the  race  and  the  individual  as  a  new 
life  —  a  regeneration  —  awakening  new  principles 
of  action,  new  motives  and  affections,  creating  aspi- 
rations after  holiness  for  its  own  sake  ;  a  holiness 
not  of  the  conduct  only  but  of  the  heart,  a  com- 
plete similitude  to  the  divine  likeness.  Thus  its 
tendency  and  its  object  were  to  supersede  the  old 
mechanical  obedience  by  a  true  spiritual  virtue  far 
transcending  in  purity  and  beauty  the  sphere  of 
mere  legal  requirements.  By  the  same  influences 
it  tended  to  deepen  man's  fear  and  hatred  of  sin,  — 
that  dreadful  evil,  so  abhorrent  to  God,  so  variant 
from  his  character,  so  disastrous  to  his  universe, 
so  fatal  to  holiness  and  the  soul,  so  enormous  a  woe 
as  to  have  necessitated  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  him- 
self that  man  might  be  redeemed  from  its  power 
and  consequences.  Nor  did  it  excite  his  longing 
for  holiness  and  the  divine  acceptance,  while  leav- 
ing these  beyond  his  reach  on  account  of  his  weak- 
ness and  guilt.  It  provided  the  means  of  obtaining 
a  full  forgiveness  for  past  transgressions  while  really 
striving  after  spiritual  life,  and  strength  beyond  his 
own  to  aid  him  in  his  struggles.  Thus  it  supplied 
the  deficiences  of  the  law  by  admitting  faith  to 
supply  the  incompleteness  of  works,  and  so  con- 
stantly inspired  the  believer  with  new  courage  and 
energy  in  his  endeavors  after  perfect  obedience. 


THE  MORAL  SYSTEM  PROGRESSIVE.  301 

Thus  the  rise  and  growth  of  Christianity  among 
the  race  represents  the  maturity,  the  manhood  of 
its  moral  development.  In  it  we  behold  man's  at- 
tainment to  the  true  conception  of  moral  principles 
(as  distinguished  from  a  moral  law^),  and  a  just  ap- 
preciation of  their  elevating,  ennobling,  liberating 
nature,  —  his  transit,  in  short,  from  a  formal  to  a 
spiritual  religion.  Not  that  this  complete  result  is 
yet  fully  manifested :  not  at  once  does  the  man 
reach  all  the  maturity  and  power  of  his  manhood,  or 
the  Christian  the  culmination  of  his  Christian  expe- 
rience. But  the  race  has  entered  on  the  period 
when  its  previous  education  has  ripened,  and  truth 
begins  to  bring  forth  her  perfect  fruits.  How  great 
the  harvest  shall  finally  prove,  is  known  to  the  In- 
finite alone  ;  but  if  we  look  abroad  upon  the  world, 
bad  as  it  still  is,  and  observe  what  Christianity  has 
done  for  it  already,  we  may  form  some  conception 
of  the  greatness  and  glory  which,  when  the  race 
and  the  world  shall  end,  that  religion  as  the  last 
stage  in  the  divine  scheme  of  man's  moral  advance- 
ment will  be  seen  to  have  achieved  for  him  and  in 
him. 

Having  thus  traced  man's  moral  progress  from 
unconsciousness  to  instinct,  from  instinct  to  disci- 
pline, from  discipline  to  faith  and  liberty,  the  in- 
quiry naturally  arises,  whether  in  these,  so  far  as 
they  shall  be  manifested  or  experienced  on  Earth, 
the  race  will  find  the  last  stage  of  its  advancement. 
To  this  question  that  great  eternal  future  which 


302  THE  RISE  AND  THE  FALL. 

shall  open  to  all  of  us,  can  alone  supply  the  full 
response.  Yet  as  to  the  nature  of  that  response 
Revelation  offers  no  indistinct  intimations.  As  we 
have  illustrated  the  moral  history  of  the  race,  in  its 
various  steps,  by  corresponding  moral  advancements 
of  the  individual,  so  we  look  forward  as  a  race,  after 
the  dissolution  of  this  material  world,  to  the  new 
heavens  and  the  new  earth,  with  the  same  faith  as 
we  expect  the  ultimate  holiness  and  blessedness,  in 
another  sphere,  of  him  who  has  passed  through  an 
accepted  experience  in  this.  God  has  created  man- 
kind to  exhibit  his  grand  system  of  grace  in  their 
sanctification  and  redemption  ;  and  neither  with 
respect  to  the  race  as  a  whole,  nor  to  the  separate 
beings  that  compose  it,  will  the  work  be  left  unfin- 
ished. The  last  great  stage  will  be,  as  was  the 
beginning,  conducted  under  his  own  personal  super- 
vision. Man,  —  the  perfect  (or  perfected*)  man  in 
Christ  Jesus,  once  more  innocent,  —  not  now,  as  at 
the  first,  from  moral  ignorance,  but  from  a  matured 
moral  wisdom  and  strength,  —  in  God's  image,  not 
merely  in  a  natural  but  in  a  spiritual  likeness  also, 
will  again  walk  with  his  Maker  as  a  personal  dis- 
ciple and  familiar  friend.  In  that  final  heavenly 
Paradise,  the  description  of  which  closes  the  Bible, 
as  that  of  the  primal  and  earthly  Eden  commences 
it,  it  is  proclaimed  that  "the  Tabernacle  of  God 
shall  be  with  men,  and  He  himself  shall  dwell  with 
them,  their  God."  There  "  there  shall  be  no  more 
sorrow,  nor  pain,  nor  crying,  and  no  more  curse ;  " 


THE  MORAL  SYSTEM  PROGRESSIVE.     303 

and  man  shall  again  **  have  right  to  the  Tree  of 
Life,"  which  shall  "  stand  by  the  river  in  the  midst 
of  the  City,"  as  of  old  "  in  the  midst  of  the  gar- 
den ; "  for,  "  to  him  that  has  OVERCOME,"  the  divine 
companionship,  with  freedom,  rest,  and  immortality, 
are  no  longer  incompatible  with  "  THE  KNOWLEDGE 

OF  GOOD  AND  EVIL." 


Here  we  must  pause.  Neither  our  purpose  nor 
our  limits  permit  us  to  pursue  the  subject  further. 
We  set  out  to  learn,  if  possible,  somewhat  of  God's 
moral  plan,  by  investigating  that  portion  of  its  his- 
tory which  relates  to  the  origin  of  moral  evil  in 
the  world.  If  any  light  has  been  let  in  upon  this 
from  nature  or  from  revelation,  —  a  light  revealing 
more  clearly  than  before  the  goodness,  the  justice, 
the  consistency,  the  upward  progress,  without  check 
or  failure,  of  God's  moral  system,  while  not  obscur- 
ing but  rather  illustrating  the  great  facts  of  human 
corruption  and  human  free  agency,  —  then  others 
with  stronger  vision,  will  see  more  fully  than  we 
the  truths  which  it  discloses,  and  lift  the  curtain  for 
more  perfect  revelations. 


APPENDIX. 


APPENDIX. 


FROM  THE  ANNOTATED  PARAGRAPH  BIBLE.  Genesis. 

Chap.  I. 

AND  God  said,  Let  the  waters  bring  forth  abundantly  20 
the  moving  [or  creeping]  creature  that  hath  life,  and 
fowl  that  may  fly  above  the  earth  in  the  open  firma- 
ment of  heaven.    And  God  created  great  whales,  and  21 
every  living  creature  that  moveth,  which  the  waters 
brought  forth  abundantly,  after  their  kind,  and  every 
winged  fowl  after  his  kind  :  and  God  saw  that  it  was 
good.     And  God  blessed  them,  saying,  Be  fruitful,  22 
and  multiply,  and  fill  the  waters  in  the  seas,  and  let 
fowl  multiply  in  the  earth.     And  the  evening  and  the  23 
morning  were  the  fifth  day. 

And  God  said,  Let  the  earth  bring  forth  the  living  24 
creature   after  his  kind,  cattle,  and  creeping  thing, 
and  beast  of  the  earth  after  his  kind :  and  it  was  so, 
And  God  made  the  beast  of  the  earth  after  his  kind,  25 
and  cattle  after  their  kind,  and  every  thing  that  creep- 
eth  upon  the  earth  after  his  kind :  and  God  saw  that 
it  was  good. 

And  God  said,  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image,  after  26 
our  likeness :  and  let  them  have  dominion  over  the 
fish  of  the  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over 
the  cattle,  and  over  all  the  earth,  and  over  every 
creeping  thing  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth.    So  God  27 
created  man  in  his  own  image,  in  the  image  of  God 
created  he  him ;  male  and  female  created  he  them. 
And  God  blessed  them,  and  God  said  unto  them,  Be  28 


308  APPENDIX. 

fruitful,  and  multiply,  and  replenish  the  earth,  and 
subdue  it :  and  have  dominion  over  the  fish  of  the  sea, 
and  over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over  every  living 

29  thing  that  moveth  upon  the  earth.     And  God  said, 
Behold,  I  have  given  you  every  herb  bearing  seed, 
which  is  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth,  and  every  tree, 
in  the  which  is  the  fruit  of  a  tree  yielding  seed ;  to 

30  you  it  shall  be  for  meat.     And  to  every  beast  of  the 
earth,  and  to  every  fowl  of  the  air,  and  to  every  thing 
that  creepeth  upon  the  earth,  wherein  there  is  life, 
[a  living  soul,]  /  have  given  every  green  herb  for 

31  meat :  and  it  was  so.     And  God  saw  every  thing  that 
he  had  made,  and  behold,  it  was  very  good.     And  the 
evening  and  the  morning  were  the  sixth  day. 

Cb.  II.  Thus  the  heavens  and  the  earth  were  finished,  and  all 
the  host  of  them.  And  on  the  seventh  day  God  ended 
his  work  which  he  had  made ;  and  he  rested  on  the 
seventh  day  from  all  his  work  which  he  had  made. 
8  And  God  blessed  the  seventh  day,  and  sanctified  it : 
because  that  in  it  he  had  rested  from  all  his  work 
which  God  created  and  made. 

7  And  the  LORD  God  formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the 
ground,  and  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of 
life  [lives]  ;  and  man  became  a  living  soul. 

8  And  the   LORD  God  planted  a  garden  eastward  in 
Eden ;  and  there  he  put  the  man  whom  he  had  formed. 

9  And  out  of  the  ground  made  the  LORD  God  to  grow 
every  tree  that  is  pleasant  to  the  sight,  and  good  for 
food  ;  the  tree  of  life  also  in  the  midst  of  the  garden, 
and  the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil. 

15  And  the  LORD  God  took  the  man  [or,  Adam]  and 
put  him  into  the  garden  of  Eden,  to  dress  it,  and  to 

16  keep  it.     And  the  LORD  God  commanded  the  man, 

17  saying,   Of  every  tree  of  the  garden  thou  mayest 
freely  eat :  but  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good 
and  evil,  thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it :  for  in  the  day  that 
thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely  die. 


APPENDIX.  309 

And  the  LORD  God  said, — It  is  not  good  that  the  man  18 
should  be  alone :  I  will  make  him  an  help  meet  for 
him.     And  out  of  the  ground  the  LORD  God  formed  19 
every  beast  of  the  field  and  every  fowl  of  the  air ;  and 
brought  them  unto  Adam  [or,  the  man]  to  see  what  he 
would  call  them ;  and  whatsoever  Adam  called  every 
living  creature,  that   teas  the   name   thereof.     And  20 
Adam  gave  names  to  all  cattle,  and  to  the  fowl  of  the 
air,  and  to  every  beast  of  the  field ;  but  for  Adam 
there  was  not  found  an  help  meet  for  him. 
And  the  LORD  God  caused  a  deep  sleep  to  fall  upon  21 
Adam,  and  he  slept :  and  he  took  one  of  his  ribs,  and 
closed  up  the  flesh  instead  thereof:  and  the  rib,  which  22 
the   LORD   God  had  taken   from  man,  made  he  a 
woman,  and  brought  her  unto  the  man.     And  Adam  23 
said,  This  is  now  bone  of  my  bones,  and  flesh  of  my 
flesh :  she  shall  be  called  woman,  [Isha,]  because  she 
was  taken  out  of  man  [Ish].     Therefore  shall  a  man  24 
leave  his  father  and  his  mother,  and  shall  cleave  unto 
his  wife  :  and  they  shall  be  one  flesh.     And  they  were  25 
both  naked,   the   man   and  his  wife,  and  were  not 
ashamed. 

Now  the  serpent  was  more  subtil  than  any  beast  of  Ch.  III. 
the  field  which  the  LORD  God  had  made :  and  he  said 
unto  the  woman,  Yea,  hath  God  said,  Ye  shall  not  eat 
of  every  tree  of  the  garden  ?     And  the  woman  said  2 
unto  the  serpent,  We  may  eat  of  the  fruit  of  the  trees 
of  the  garden :  but  of  the  fruit  of  the  tree  which  is  in  3 
the  midst  of  the  garden,  God  hath  said,  Ye  shall  not 
eat  of  it,  neither  shall  ye  touch  it,  lest  ye  die.     And  4 
the  serpent  said  unto  the  woman,  Ye  shall  not  surely 
die  :  for  God  doth  know  that  in  the  day  ye  eat  there-  5 
of,  then  your  eyes  shall  be  opened,  and  ye  shall  be  as 
gods,  knowing  good  and  evil. 

And  when  the  woman  saw  that  the  tree  was  good  for  6 
food,  and  that  it  teas  pleasant  to  the  eyes,  and  a  tree 


310  APPENDIX. 

to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise,  she  took  of  the  fruit 
thereof,  and  did  eat,  and  gave  also  unto  her  husband 

7  with  her ;  and  he  did  eat.    And  the  eyes  of  them  both 
were  opened,  and  they  knew  that  they  were  naked ; 
and  they  sewed  fig  leaves  together,  and  made  them- 
selves aprons. 

8  And  they  heard  the  voice  of  the  LORD  God  walking 
in  the  garden  in  the   cool  of  the  day :   and  Adam 
and  his  wife  hid  themselves  from  the  presence   of 

9  the  LORD  God  amongst  the  trees  of  the  garden.   And 
the   LORD   God   called   unto  Adam,  and  said  unto 

10  him,  Where  art  thou  ?     And  he  said,  I  heard  thy 
voice  in  the  garden,  and  I  was  afraid  because  I  was 

11  naked;  and  I  hid  myself.     And  he  said,  Who  told 
thee  that  thou  wast  naked  ?     Hast  thou  eaten  of  the 
tree  whereof  I  commanded  thee  that  thou  shouldest 

1 2  not  eat  ?     And  the  man  said,  The  woman  whom  thou 
gavest  to  be  with  me,  she  gave  me  of  the  tree,  and  I 

13  did  eat.     And  the  LORD  God  said  unto  the  woman, 
What  is  this  that  thou  hast  done  ?     And  the  woman 
said,  The  serpent  beguiled  me,  and  I  did  eat. 

14  And  the  LORD  God  said  unto  the  serpent,  Because 
thou  hast  done  this,  thou  art  cursed  above  all  cattle, 
and  above  every  beast  of  the  field ;  upon  thy  belly 
shalt  thou  go,  and  dust  shalt  thou  eat  all  the  days  of 

15  thy  life  ;  and  I  will  put  enmity  between  thee  and  the 
woman,  and  between  thy  seed  and  her  seed  :  it  shall 
bruise  thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel. 

16  Unto  the  woman  he  said,  I  will  greatly  multiply  thy 
sorrow  and  thy  conception ;  in  sorrow  thou  shalt  bring 
forth  children ;  and  thy  desire  shall  be  to  thy  husband, 
and  he  shall  rule  over  thee. 

17  And  unto  Adam  he  said,  Because  thou  hast  hearkened 
unto  the  voice  of  thy  wife,  and  hast  eaten  of  the  tree 
of  which  I  commanded  thee,  saying,  Thou  shalt  not 
eat  of  it :  cursed  is  the  ground  for  thy  sake  ;  in  sor- 


APPENDIX.  311 

row  shalt  thou  eat  of  it  all  the  days  of  thy  life :  thorns  18 
also  and  thistles  shall  it  bring  forth  to  thee  ;  and  thou 
shalt  eat  the  herb  of  the  field;  in  the  sweat  of  thy  19 
face  shalt  thou  eat  bread,  till  thou  return  unto  the 
ground  ;  for  out  of  it  wast  thou  taken  ;  for  dust  thou 
art,  and  unto  dust  shalt  thou  return. 
And  Adam  called  his  wife's  name  Eve,  [i.  e.,  living,]  20 
because  she  was  the  mother  of  all  living.    Unto  Adam  21 
also  and  to  his  wife  did  the  LORD  God  make  coats  of 
skins,  and  clothed  them. 

And  the  LORD  God  said,  Behold,  the  man  is  become  22 
as  one  of  us,  to  know  good  and  evil ;  and  now,  lest  he 
put  forth  his  hand,  and  take  also  of  the  tree  of  life, 
and  eat,  and  live  forever :  therefore  the  LORD  God  23 
sent  him  forth  from  the  garden  of  Eden,  to  till  the 
ground  from  whence  he  was  taken.     So  he  drove  out  24 
the  man ;  and  he  placed  at  the  east  of  the  garden  of 
Eden  cherubim,  and  a  flaming  sword  which  turned 
every  way,  to  keep  the  way  of  the  tree  of  life. 


Ctst  of  Books  pubU0I)c0  bg 

HURD  AND  HOUGHTON. 

Bayard  Taylor's  Writings. 

The  Story  of  Kennett. 

A  Novel.    12mo.    Price  $2.25. 

John  Godfrey's  Fortunes: 

Ilelated  by  himself.     A  Story  of  American  Life.     12mo. 
Price  $2.25. 

Hannah  Thurston: 

A  Story  of  American  Life.     12mo.    Price  $2.25. 

Eldorado : 

Or,  Adventures  in  the  Path  of  Empire  (Mexico  and  Cali- 
fornia).    12mo.    Price  $2.25. 

Central  Africa: 

Life  and  Landscape  from  Cairo  to  the  White  Nile.    12mo. 
Price  $2.25. 

Greece  and  Russia: 

With  an  Excursion  to  Crete.     12mo.    Price  $2.25. 

Home  and  Abroad: 

A  Sketch-Book  of  Life,  Scenery,  and  Men.    12mo.    Price 
$2.25. 

Home  and  Abroad.    (SECOND  SERIES.) 
A  new  volume.     12mo.    Price  $2.25. 

India,  China,  and  Japan. 

12mo.    Price  $2.25. 

Lands  of  the  Saracen: 

Or,  Pictures  of  Palestine,  Asia  Minor,  Sicily,  and  Spain. 
12mo.    Price  $2.25. 

Northern  Travel: 

Summer  and  Winter  Pictures  of  Sweden,  Denmark,  and 
Lapland.     12mo.     Price  $2.2C. 

Views  A-Foot: 

Or,  Europe  seen  with  Knapsack  and  Staff.     12mo     Price 

$2.25. 


LIST  OF  BOOKS  PUBLISHED. 


NEW  EDITION  OP  IRVING. 

THE  COMPLETE  WORKS  OF  WASHINGTON  IRVING, 
now  issuing  in  portable  16mo.  volumes,  with  appropriate  Vig- 
nettes and  Ornaments,  under  the  title  of  the  "  Riverside 
Edition."  Each  volume  sold  separately. 

Now  ready. 

SKETCH-BOOK,  BRACEBRIDGE  HALL, 

KNICKERBOCKER,  ALHAMBRA, 

GOLDSMITH,  WOLFERT'S  ROOST, 

THE  TRAVELLER,  CRAYON. 

16mo.  vellum  cloth,  gilt  tops,  each  §2.00. 

Irving's  Works.  Sunnyside  Edition,  including  the  Life  of 
Irving  by  his  Nephew,  PIERRE  M.  IRVING.  Printed  on 
tinted  paper,  and  with  numerous  illustrations.  26  vols.  12mo. 
Price  each  $2.50.  Half  calf,  each  $4.00. 

Irving's  Life  of  Washington.  Sunnyside  Edition. 
Printed  on  tinted  paper,  and  with  numerous  steel  engravings. 
6  vols.  12mo.  Price  $12.50.  Half  calf,  $20.00. 

Irving's  Life  and  Letters.  Edited  by  his  Nephew, 
PIERRE  M.  IRVING.  Sunnyside  Edition.  Printed  on  tinted 
paper,  and  with  numerous  illustrations.  4  vols.  12mo. 
Price  $10.00.  Half  calf,  $16.00. 

The    Complete    Works    of   Thomas  Hood.     With 

Illustrations  from  his  own  Designs.    Printed  on  tinted  paper. 
6  vols.    Crown  8vo.    Price  $15.00.    Half  calf,  $21.00. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  HURD  AND  HOUGHTON. 

Illustrate* 


THE  FABLES  OF  ^SOP,  with  a  Life  of  the  Author  and 
Croxall's  Applications.  Illustrated  with  one  hundred  and 
eleven  Engravings,  from  original  designs  by  H.  W.  Herrick. 
A  fine  edition,  printed  on  tinted  paper,  from  clear  and 
handsome  type. 

Crown  8vo.    Extra  cloth,  bevelled 84.00. 

Full  gik 5.00. 

From  the  Boston  Transctipt. 
"  One  of  the  great  Classics  of  the  world,  in  a  form  worthy  of  it* 

universal  fame." 

From  the  N.  Y.  Times. 

"  The  finest  specimen  of  printing  yet  produced  in  this  country." 
PICCIOLA.    ByX.  B.  Saintine.    A  new  translation  from  the 
Author's  last  revised  edition.     With  Illustrations  on  wood 
by  Leopold  Flameng,  and  ornamental  head  and  tail-pieces. 
Fine  edition.    1  vol.  crown  8vo.    Cloth,  gilt..  83.00. 

Cabinet  edition.     1  voL  16mo.     Cloth 1.50. 

THE  TWENTY-THIRD  PSALM.  Richly  Illuminated 
with  Emblematic  Borders,  and  printed  in  Colors  by  J.  Bien. 
1  vol.  quarto.  Price,  84.50. 

THE  THREE  KINGS  OF  ORIENT.  A  Carol.  By  Rev. 
J.  H.  Hopkins,  Jr.  Each  page  Illustrated.  Printed  in 
Colors  by  J.  Bien.  1  vol.  quarto.  Price,  84.50. 
CHRISTMAS  POEMS  AND  PICTURES.  A  Collection 
of  Carols,  Songs,  and  Descriptive  Poems,  relating  to  the 
Festival  of  Christmas.  Richly  Illustrated  with  numerous 
Engravings  on  wood,  from  drawings  by  famous  Artists.  A 
new  and  improved  edition.  In  one  quarto  volume. 

Extra  cloth,  bevelled  boards,  gilt 84.00. 

Turkey  morocco 7.50. 

WATTS'  DIVINE  AND  MORAL  SONGS.  Elegantly 
Illustrated.  1  vol.  small  Quarto. 

Cloth,  gilt 84.50. 

Turkey  morocco 8.00. 


LIST  OF  BOOKS  PUBLISHED 

Standard  Works. 
BACON. 

THE  WORKS  OF  FRANCIS  BACON,  Baron  of  Verulam, 
Viscount  St.  Albans,  and  Lord  High  Chancellor  of  England. 
Collected  and  edited  by  JAMES  SPEDIHNG,  M.  A.,  ROBERT 
LESLIE  ELLIS,  M.  A.,  and  DOUGLAS  DENON  HEATH,  with 
two  Steel  Portraits  of  Lord  Bacon,  and  a  complete  Index. 
In  fifteen  volumes,  crown  8vo.  Price  in  extra  cloth,  uncut, 
$33.75  ;  half  calf,  gilt  or  antique,  $63.75. 

CARLYLE. 

CRITICAL  AND  MISCELLANEOUS  ESSAYS.  Collected 
and  republished  by  THOMAS  CARLYLE,  with  a  new  Portrait 
of  the  Author  and  a  copious  Index.  In  four  vols.,  crown  8vo. 
Price  in  extra  cloth,  uncut,  $9.00 ;  half  calf,  gilt  or  antique, 
$16.00. 

DE  STAEL. 

GERMANY.  By  Madame  the  Baroness  DE  STAEL  HOLSTEIN, 
with  Notes  and  Appendices  by  O.  W.  WIGHT,  A.  M.  In  two 
volumes,  crown  8vo.  Price  hi  extra  cloth,  uncut,  $4.50 ;  half 
calf,  gilt  or  antique,  §8.00. 

FENELON. 

ADVENTURES  OF  TELEMACHUS.  By  FENELON;  trans- 
lated by  DR.  HAWKESWORTH,  with  a  Life  of  Fenelon  by  LA- 
MARTINE  ;  Biographical  Notices,  &c.  &c.  Edited  by  0.  W. 
WIGHT,  A.  M.  In  one  volume,  crown  8vo.  Price  in  extra 
cloth,  uncut,  $2.25 ;  half  calf,  gilt  or  antique,  §4.00. 

MONTAIGNE. 

WORKS  OF  MICHAEL  DE  MONTAIGNE.  Comprising 
his  Essays,  Journey  into  Italy,  and  Letters ;  with  Notes  from 
all  the  Commentators,  Biographical  and  Bibliographical  No- 
tices, &c.  By  W.  HAZLITT.  With  a  portrait  of  Montaigne. 
A  new  and  carefully  revised  edition,  edited  by  O.  W.  WIGHT. 
In  four  volumes,  crown  8vo.  Price  in  extra  cloth,  uncut, 
$9.00;  half  calf,  gilt  or  antique,  §16.00. 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  UBfiARYFAOLITY 


